Monday

Women and Suicide: Things You May Not Know

When I was in my troubled teens, I used to threaten suicide to my mother.
Well, I'll just kill myself.
Her response?
Well, go ahead then.
I was always totally befuddled by her lack of compassion. Shouldn't a mother plead with a daughter that she not take her young life? No. My mother would never let me use words to lay a guilt trip on her.

But what if I had done it? What if I had actually proceeded?

I fantasized about how I would do it. There were no guns in our home, to my knowledge. Our kitchen knives always really sucked. I even tried slitting each of my fingertips, vertically, and I could barely produce blood. We had really sharp scissors though! But most of all, we had lots of medicines...nothing hardcore--just the basic pain relievers. A seemingly quiet way to go.

I imagined downing a bottle of chalky, white, bitter aspirins. How the hell could I overdose on those?! My tastebuds and gag reflex would not allow. But then there were those yummy-coated Advil pills. How much would I have to take? What if I didn't succeed? That would be totally embarrassing!

***

My mother tells a story of a Jehovah's witness visiting our home when we were children. They would come through the neighborhood with their colorful pamphlets and small bibles, asking for just a moment of your time. Typically, you wouldn't answer the door, but it was hard sometimes because these people were sooooo friendly. As my mother believed the Word was good, she let a small group of witnesses into our home to share lessons with my sister.

As the lessons progressed, my sister increasingly began threatening suicide in the heat of parental arguments. She wanted to go to a "better place."

What better place?

That wonderfully luscious place with deep and bright green plants and beautifully colored flowers where the weather was warm and fruits were on the trees and you could walk around on top of the clouds with a mere leaf covering your private parts and God was right there watching you. Wouldn't you want to go there? Don't you want to live forever in eternal bliss?

My mother stopped them from coming and threw all the pamphlets and bibles in the garbage.

***

I've never really understood what the big deal is about committing suicide. I mean, if you want to end your own life, isn't it your right? Why should you care about who you've left behind, you'll be dead? That is their problem, isn't it? I never understood how the bible could describe such a wonderful afterlife in heaven...the life that we've all been waiting for...but somehow, if we choose the jump the gun (no pun intended), we no longer qualify for the eternal reward. If you choose suicide, you go to hell. How is that fair? I am sorry to hear that people commit suicide, but it seems like their own personal right to self-determination. How can I convince you that the reward is greater if you stay here on earth? Maybe I can, but I can't make you any promises. Only you can do that. Just remember suicide is a solo act--meaning, no one else should be involved.

***

Have you ever thought about harming yourself, or others?

Um, well, not exactly *looks around the room, no eye contact*.........okay, well, yeah, maybe *fiddles with hands, shakes right leg* ...but I'm not going to do it.

Do you have a plan about how you would harm yourself, if you were to do so?

NO!! *rolls eyes, thinking, "And why the fuck would I tell you?"*

***

This was me in counseling, or at the doctor, or both, shit, I can't remember. This was during the height of the abusive marriage I was in. I hated being asked that question because I didn't know if I should tell the truth, or what they wanted to hear, or not hear. I vacillated between the answers frequently. It was a conscious mental battle. This is the problem with psych questions...psych evaluations...they can't evaluate you if you don't tell the truth. But you don't really want to the tell the truth, because you know the difference between right and wrong. And this was voluntary counseling for me--think about when people are forced to go ie custody decisions.

Yeah, I fucking thought about suicide. I was miserable, beat up, beat down, and felt trapped. But I also thought about homicide:
If I could only just take that bitch out who my husband fucked and impregnated.
Nah, that would never work for me, because I was always a woman who believed that the issue was never the other woman, the problem is your man. Now if only I could've taken this muthafucker out! Homicide was more attractive because even though I'd rot in jail, I'd get the benefit of seeing my child thrive in freedom. Then again, what a bitch look like sitting in jail...prison, rather? Not my thing. I didn't grow up destitute or in poverty. I know what the other side of the fence looks like. I know I can get to where I need to be. How do I free myself?

I will tell you what honestly kept me from suicide, was the thought that my kid would have to grow up telling the story about how mom committed suicide. How my kid would have to live with my decision. I could NOT deal with that. I would never see my kid grow up. I wouldn't be there to guide and encourage my kid if life got rough. And I didn't want anyone to be there for my kid, no one to do my job, except me.

And my mother also reminded me, still in her hardcore fashion:
If you want to kill yourself, Randi, then that's your decision. Your kid will live on, we will do the raising...but No one can love your child like you. No one will treat your child like you do.
A mother's love is irreplaceable. I cry as I wrote that. I still feel her words, as fucking mean as my mother was. I made a choice to continue my pregnancy. I made a choice to have this child.

(I am extremely pro-choice as a result of all of my experiences)

****

Men's rights activists will have you believe that suicide is men's issue. Every time we talk about domestic violence and the inequalities and injustices that women face, MRAs copy-n-paste their list of gripes which include the fact that most suicides are done by men. It's the only thing they will honestly claim--kindly leaving out the fact that most violent crimes, against women, against...anyone, are committed by men, period. I would like to thank a commentor on the John Daily spoof about Male Inequality for pointing out how MRA's like to misrepresent things--skew them in their favor (like the whole domesticviolenceismutualbullshit).

Did you know that women attempt suicide 2-3 Xs as much as men? We've got caught up in the hardcore evidence--the deaths, which are mostly men. Whether or not the act was successful should be irrelevant in the overall picture.
It is well-established that women attempt suicide with nonlethal means more often than men do, however it is also tru that when suicide attempts are defined as serious (ie, requiring medical attention), the incidence among men and women is equal.
Here is some more information that I pulled from Suicide Among Women: A Critical Review, by Linda H. Chaudron and Eric D. Caine:
Highest rates of suicide is between ages 35-64

Suicide methods, greatest to least: Firearms, overdose, hanging

Black women have the lowest rates of suicide

Alaska had the highest rate of female suicide...D.C. had the lowest

Violent behavior and aggressions have been shown to be significant predictors of suicide

Intimate partner violence has been associated with increased rates of suicide attempts, but its effect on suicide risk has not been studied (<--hint, hint, study it)

Data on suicide risk in lesbian and bisexual women are lacking, however, there is an increase risk of suicide attempt among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents

Female suicide rates appear to be unaffected by unemployment. Despite a rise in unemployment among women in the U.S. between 1972 and 1986, there was a decrease in the female suicide rate.

Women who died by suicide were more likely to have higher levels of education than women who died from natural causes...physicians, police officers Navy personnel are the top

The most compelling finding for men and woman who commit suicide is the high prevalence of psychiatric illness ie all major affective, psychotic, anxiety, and substance abuse disorders
There are some major issue with the last bit of data regarding "psychiatric illnesses." First, women have been the main subjects of psychology its experimentation so the data is skewed. Second, if you are to believe in all of these "mental illnesses" why is it that most depressed persons never commit suicide? Furthermore, what of all these men killing themselves who have not being diagnosed with depression? Would it be that depression is underdiagnosed? And third, "mental illnesses" do not operate in a vacuum. They are merely the symptoms, not the actual disease. What are the actual circumstances that cause people to exhibit signs of psychosis, anxiety, etc? Do you realize that medication does not change what actually occurred or is occurring in their lives?

****

I was medicated at the advice of my family practice doctor and my therapist was in agreement (read UN-medicated for another account). I was depressed but my doctor didn't tell me that he thought so--nor did I know so. I told the doctor I was having all types of body problems: chronic stomach and back aches, hair loss, migraines. My doctor didn't know what was going on in my household. Interestingly though, my therapist didn't know the details either (read The Counseling Dilemma for a better description). I chose what I wanted to reveal, even though I was the one who freely sought the help. Understand that. The fact that I was also a psychology student did not help matters. Understand that.

So I took the meds. One, and then the next, and then the next, and then the next....and I felt...numb. I just didn't care. I didn't care about being abused. I only existed to live perfunctorily...to live under my current conditions. There was nothing else. There wasn't a future, or a past. I felt nothing. Problems not solved. Situation unchanged...well, no stomach aches, fewer migraines...more hair :P

*****
Why Women Are Less Likely Than Men To Commit Suicide

"Women process their experiences with friends. They discuss their feelings, seek feedback and take advice," Murphy says. "They are much more likely to tell a physician how they feel and cooperate in the prescribed treatment. As a result, women get better treatment for their depression."

Although suicide rates are lower among women, women lead men two to one in suicide attempts.

Cognitive differences

Murphy believes women are less inclined to commit suicide because their thinking is more inclusive. While a man might tend to throw aside seemingly peripheral issues to get to the core of a problem, a woman might take more things into account. She may continue to seek input and process problems long after the point where men decide on a course of action.

"She'll consider not just her feelings but also the feelings of others -- her family, the children, even acquaintances, and how those people will be affected by a decision like suicide," Murphy says. "A man is much less likely to take those things into account. He makes his decision, and it's about him, so he doesn't feel the need to share it with anyone else."
****

Um, not really. When I was going through most of the abuse, I shut everyone off--ask my friends. I was already isolated from them by distance. I stopped calling. I stopped answering. I was short in my e-mails that I did respond to. I had no local friends, nor did I want any because I thought I had too many problems to have friends. The only person I occasionally spoke to was the one person who I never really liked, my mother. Remember though, what she told me:
If you want to kill yourself, Randi, then that's your decision. Your kid will live on, we will do the raising...but No one can love your child like you. No one will treat your child like you do.
I sought help from a fucking stranger, a therapist, because I couldn't bear tell my friends that I had made a mistake in marrying this lying, cheating, abusive asshole. I knew he was a lying, cheating asshole before the marriage. Everyone knew it. I didn't know it was abuse and that it would get worse. But you know, having a father in your child's life and marrying your babydaddy is much more important than the health and safety of you and your child...right, Black Church? right, AFDC (TANF)? right, President Bush?

***

There were too many things in life that I needed to accomplish for me to pull off a suicide: I needed to finish college, enter my career, raise the kid, share with my friends....I needed to live. I look back at suicide and homicide think about how ridiculous it was. Sure life sucks really bad some days, court kicks my ass and at the end of the day I have pain, I cry. My joy comes in knowing I will succeed as my abuser's life is sucked away...not by me directly, but by the mere fact that I am still somebody--not the person I once was and not the person I could have become had I stayed with him. I had to remember my strength, recapture that person and realize the potential that I always had. I don't have all the answers and I am frustrated that I can't tell you do to what I do because it works for me and there are no guarantees. For some of you you will believe in god and that works for you and I am happy for you. I choose not to pass my power to something else but instead I harvest that energy back into myself while thanking my ancestors for the courage, strength, and determination that they had which runs in me.

I also have the utmost support of my dear best friend who never judges and goes with the flow. When I wanted to leave the country, she was like, You need any help? When I made decisions that no one else understood, she defends me based on her understanding of how victims and survivors can think. If I were to owe anyone all the glory, it would be her. It is my greatest desire that everyone have a friend like this.

It is also my greatest desire that people free themselves from the realms of psychological diagnoses and medications. Life is so much more beautiful when you are running the show. Then again, you'd have to live to know that.

Sunday

"That Kid Didn't Have a Chance": Restraining Orders and the Family Court

There has been another death involving restraining orders and the family court. A 7 year old boy and his coward-ass father are dead in a murder-suicide in Greece, New York. (See this article)

I've been reviewing media articles regarding this horrific murder. Two things need to be cleared up:
Family Court had issued a permanent restraining order against the man. The order included visitation with his son on some weekdays and alternate weekends, he said.

1. Restraining orders apply to the adult party and not necessarily the minor child(ren).

Family court judges often decide custody and visitation issues with no regard to orders of protection that are in place--or, they deny orders of protection altogether. This could be because of the erroneous believe that women use restraining orders to get an advantage in a divorce--though there is no evidence to support this. See where Judge David Mazurek of the latest family court involved murder in California verbalizes this belief in court:
‘One of you is lying and I think it’s you,’ he said, pointing to [the Mother].

“I get concerned when there’s a pending child custody and visitation issue and in between that, one party or the other claims that there’s some violence in between. It raises the court’s eyebrows because based on my experience, it’s a way for one party to try to gain an advantage over the other,” he said, according to the transcripts.

“If I grant the restraining order, how do you think that’s going to help with respect to you two being able to raise Wyatt together or work together to make sure Wyatt grows up happy and healthy?” the judge asked, according to the transcripts.
These judges need to be held responsible. Judges need to rule on evidence--when it does exist. But in the case of the recent murder of Alissa Blanton in Brevard County Florida, 70 pages of evidence just wasn't enough for Judge John D. Moxley, Jr to grant her motion.

Back to the murder-suicide in Greece:
Baxter said the woman had left her husband on Jan. 25, the same day she secured a temporary order of protection against him in Monroe County Family Court for alleged threats against her life.

As part of that order, the man was prohibited from owning any guns, so police removed one shotgun from the Island Cottage Drive home at that time.

The man denied owning any others.
2. Guns don't kill people (and neither does the economy). People kill people.

Yeah, I know you've heard it before and it's rather trite. But what good is searching for one gun and expecting an abuser to admit that there are others, or admit that he can get access to others? What good is a restraining order if you are still court-ordered to make contact with the person who has been restrained from you? These judges have the opportunity to take the abuser's REAL tool away from him: PEOPLE.

An abuser will utilize anything as his weapon of choice. Family courts support abusers by allowing contact between the abuser and his tools...not the guns...the people who he chooses to hurt. Mark Resch detailed his plan about how he would enact revenge. He was in charge. He needed a tool to carry out his plan and he was allowed to use his own son. "That kid" did "have a chance" : He had a chance to be protected from abuse and/or from the opportunity to be used as a tool. The unnamed judge in this case, didn't give this 7 year old kid that chance.


See Also: Dad who murdered son during court-ordered visitation motivated by "hatred"; this is surprising? (Greece, New York)

Glenn Sacks Gets Served by Domestic Violence Survivor

UPDATED!! 2/15

Jennifer Collins has done a great write-up on the "father's right's" coward, Glenn Sacks, that has continuously vilified her mother, Holly Collins. Holly Collins fled to the Netherlands with her children after the Hennepin County Minnesota family court system awarded child custody to a man who abused them all. Glenn Sacks accuses the mom of fabricating the abuse and continues his vengeful attack on Holly's grown daughter, Jennifer. He insists that Jennifer is suffering from parental alienation syndrome (although "psych" "diagnoses" cannot be made without a "professional" interviewing and evaluating all parties) and lying about the past abuse.

Read Jennifer's two-part piece:

The Real Glenn Sacks

and

College Student Jennifer Collins Exposes the Real Glen Sacks

If you are unfamiliar the the entire ordeal, it would help if you read some of the other posts she has done in which she describes how Glenn Sacks has assaulted her family.

I can only admire the courage Jennifer has continue to exhibit in battling this coward and his minions. Many have told her to stop, because he will cause her more harm, but I can understand that when someone just lies so damn much, you can't help but to defend yourself. Glenn Sacks is a bully and most people don't stand up to bullies. But this isn't grade school.

After reading both of Jennifer's pieces, the conclusion I have come to is that Glenn Sacks has very poor self-esteem and resulting extreme projection issues. I mean, it's really, really bad. So bad that I wonder if secretly he believes all these bad things about men...you know, deep, deep, down inside. He must know, deep, deep down inside, that all of the men that flock to him can't possibly all be falsely accused, or "robbed" of their parental relationships.

For now, I'm going to jump on the train of pscyhoanalyzation...shit, everyone else does it!

Glenn Sacks is indeed a bully. From WebMD:
(emphasis mine)
Children who bully:

* May witness physical and verbal violence or aggression at home. They have a positive view of this behavior, and they act aggressively toward other people, including adults.
* May hit or push other children.
* Are often physically strong.
* May or may not be popular with other children around their same age.
* Have trouble following rules.
* Show little concern for the feelings of others.

Many bullies think highly of themselves. They like being looked up to. And they often expect everyone to behave according to their wishes. Children who bully are often not taught to think about how their actions make other people feel.

I utilize the child bully article because Glenn Sacks' behavior is really childlike. I can imagine him sitting at home searching for misandry with a magnifying glass, with his arms crossed in front of his chest and his bottom lip poked out. My thought is that his bullying behavior prevents him from other destructive behaviors like drug abuse or alcoholism.

But here's a piece on adult bullying. Wait, there are waaaay too many characteristics! Let's just pick out the best:

(emphasis mine)

  • is a convincing, practised liar and when called to account, will make up anything spontaneously to fit their needs at that moment
  • has a Jekyll and Hyde nature - is vile, vicious and vindictive in private, but innocent and charming in front of witnesses; no-one can (or wants to) believe this individual has a vindictive nature - only the current target of the serial bully's aggression sees both sides; whilst the Jekyll side is described as "charming" and convincing enough to deceive personnel, management and a tribunal, the Hyde side is frequently described as "evil"; Hyde is the real person, Jekyll is an act
  • excels at deception and should never be underestimated in their capacity to deceive
  • uses excessive charm and is always plausible and convincing when peers, superiors or others are present (charm can be used to deceive as well as to cover for lack of empathy)
  • is glib, shallow and superficial with plenty of fine words and lots of form - but there's no substance
  • is possessed of an exceptional verbal facility and will outmanoeuvre most people in verbal interaction, especially at times of conflict
  • relies on mimicry, repetition and regurgitation to convince others that he or she is both a "normal" human being and a tough dynamic manager, as in extolling the virtues of the latest management fads and pouring forth the accompanying jargon
  • is unusually skilled in being able to anticipate what people want to hear and then saying it plausibly
  • is emotionally retarded with an arrested level of emotional development; whilst language and intellect may appear to be that of an adult, the bully displays the emotional age of a five-year-old
  • is emotionally immature and emotionally untrustworthy
  • exhibits unusual and inappropriate attitudes to sexual matters, sexual behaviour and bodily functions; underneath the charming exterior there are often suspicions or hints of sex discrimination and sexual harassment, perhaps also sexual dysfunction, sexual inadequacy, sexual perversion, sexual violence or sexual abuse
  • is self-opinionated and displays arrogance, audacity, a superior sense of entitlement and sense of invulnerability and untouchability
  • is a control freak and has a compulsive need to control everyone and everything you say, do, think and believe; for example, will launch an immediate personal attack attempting to restrict what you are permitted to say if you start talking knowledgeably about psychopathic personality or antisocial personality disorder in their presence - but aggressively maintains the right to talk (usually unknowledgeably) about anything they choose; serial bullies despise anyone who enables others to see through their deception and their mask of sanity
  • undermines and destroys anyone who the bully perceives to be an adversary, a potential threat, or who can see through the bully's mask
  • may pursue a vindictive vendetta against anyone who dares to held them accountable, perhaps using others' resources and contemptuous of the damage caused to other people and organisations in pursuance of the vendetta
  • is also quick to belittle, undermine, denigrate and discredit anyone who calls, attempts to call, or might call the bully to account

Was that enough?

I have separated the last few because I think they so perfectly fit in with Glenn Sacks and his role in the fathers' and men's right movement and the movement at large.
  • poisons peoples' minds by manipulating their perceptions
  • is arrogant, haughty, high-handed, and a know-all
  • often has an overwhelming, unhealthy and narcissistic attention-seeking need to portray themselves as a wonderful, kind, caring and compassionate person, in contrast to their behaviour and treatment of others; the bully sees nothing wrong with their behavior and chooses to remain oblivious to the discrepancy between how they like to be seen and how they are seen by others
  • is constantly imposing on others a false reality made up of distortion and fabrication

Now I'm going to borrow some of the Glenn Sacks quotes that Jennifer displayed:

“I told my dad that I thought he lived a pathetic existence and I did not understand why he had much will to live at all.”
Isn't it true that some people just love to work and in fact, are workaholics? Or maybe they just love money? Or maybe they love being providers? And if given the choice between working outside the home and perhaps being a homemaker, they would still choose the former? Why not respect that instead of the suicidal implications? People do not have the same desires or values.
“The only credit left for men is the military, and even this has been partially hijacked. We now speak of ‘the men and women who fought and died in our wars’ as if even one percent of our military casualties were ever suffered by women, or as if women were ever conscripted the way men were.”
Hijacked? Rather dramatic. No one said the deaths were equal but it would be correct to acknowledge that men and women die in the military...and they don't always have to be in combat. Is that so painful to admit?
“While it's easy and popular to blame men, many of the wounds women bear from failed relationships and loneliness are self-inflicted.”
There is enough blame to share. But a harsh reality that Sacks, and others like him, don't acknowledge (on purpose) is that a lot of this can be attributed not to fatherlessness, but to childhood sexual abuse or family violence in general (ask some real psychologists/psychiatrists who are fortunate to know their patients' entire histories). If abuse is a child's first intimate experience, it would stand to reason that there may be complications with adult intimate relationships.
"Fathers need to start parenting the way they want to parent. When they do there's no guarantee that the mother will go along with it, and that can cause problems, but men need to stop waiting for their wives' approval."
Hold up. This is a major red flag. I thought parenting in a relationship was a joint venture? If you want to have it your way, you should remain single and try adoption.
“Most marital problems and marriage counseling sessions revolve around why the wife is unhappy with her husband,”
There is a good damn reason for this: It is typically the women who profess to be unhappy, and the men who still don't have a clue for some reason. Also, women are the ones who initiate counseling with the desire to improve the marital relationship. It is a good sign because she cares enough (or maybe bad sign because she still wants to hold on).
“People in general seem convinced that stay-at-home moms get a raw deal and work much harder than breadwinner dads… Having been a stay-at-home dad with two kids during the years when they need the most intensive care, I can tell you that this is nonsense.”
This one was hilarious. First, no two stay at home parents do the exact same thing in a day, parent the same, have the same responsibilities, etc...so it is completely unfair to make this generalization. There are some stay at homes whose kids are gone for the school day, and then have extra-curricular activities...perhaps the kids are independent and there is no need for parental help with school work. Too many variations. And sometimes it really isn't about the kids, wholly, but the totality of what is to be accomplished, or expected to accomplished, for the entire family.
"I can't eliminate ... rap music that trashes women. So I choose the battles I can win, and go from there."
The old misogynistic rap music argument used by White men...except they somehow fail to realize how it is evidence of misogyny, in general, that is endemic in our society. Black men don't trash Black women in a vacuum. Read some bell hooks. But the father's rights movement makes sure to target Black men into their hate camp without addressing Black issues at large. Works out quite nicely, doesn't it? (see Father's Rights Co-opting of Issues that Affect Families of Color)
“Success in school is tightly correlated with the ability to sit still, be quiet, and complete work which is presented in a dull, assembly-line fashion… the methods and structure they employ are not suited to our sons' needs.”
It doesn't fit many children's needs...boys and girls. However, seems that with all the complaining Sacks does, he'd just homeschool his son, especially since being a stay at home is so simple.
“Many of our boys will have spent much of the day being scolded and punished, often for doing nothing more than being boys… each of these mistreated little boys…Everyone always says girls in school suffer; they have low self-esteem; teachers make them feel second best, blah blah blah… But it's obvious that, in general, girls are doing better in school, and boys are falling behind."
Consider for a moment that boys may be suffering in our public school system because of the rigid gender roles that society, and their fathers parents, confine them to. Boys may want to be teachers, daycare providers, seamstresses, etc, but maybe they are limited by what people think they should be. Feminism has opened up the realm for women to not only dream of being, but to be. Maybe that's why girls are excelling. But the folks in the fatherhood camps are always try to throw men back with the reclaiming of masculinity and other bullshit (note the number of times they talk about "emasculation"). The next part is a nice display:
"we've made a lot of fathers into wimps--not only have many fathers been driven out of their kids lives by the family courts, not only do we have many women deciding to have kids on their own, but the fathers who are in the home have become a lot weaker because we've made the idea of a strong father into a bad thing."
Wimps? And is this true, or have we made putting up with an abusive, drunk, cheating, assholish father a bad thing?


Thank you Jennifer for doing the research and continuing to be strong. You are a survivor.

I'd like to end with a clip to lighten things up a bit:


The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Male Inequality
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political Humor



Thought I was done. I want to include some lucid thoughts from an online divorce forum:

(emphasis mine)
That statement is the only REAL thing that exhists in Family Law Court. Don't contact Glenn S.u.c.k.s., excuse me, Sacks, for he and his group Fathers and Families are the REAL reason the Family Law Courts are out of control.

This child was hurt because the system failed, not because the "mother" was diabolical. Glenn and his rabbid pack of dogs have been funding court corruption and there is plenty of proof. While they think they are getting the upper hand in Courtrooms all over the country, the only thing that is progressing is the just how much money the Judges, and all the corrupt players they appoint are now getting.

You are supporting the corruption. Shame on you. This isn't happening because of women's groups. This is happening because of greed. Glenn S u c k s is not an expert, although, he is making money hand over fist, leading disturbed men astray, speaking and changing laws that were designed to protect children from abuse. He himself decided that NO child needs to be protected from abuse, be it abuse of a mother, or a father. He supports "alienation" theorys, which means that no child will be protected. Open the door and they all come flooding in, with excuse after excuse to drag court cases out for years, while the children are emotionally raped, and the parents are financially raped. Today the hot button is alienation, and tomorrow it will be something else. Stop supporting people that make excuses, solely for profit, which Glenn and all the other's have done.

And another thing for Glenn to realize, by the age of three or four, children have either bonded or not to the parent. A court order isnt going to make them love you, respect you, or even want to be around you. It's the ego's of these parents that get in the way, of what the child needs.

I was a long time supporter of Glenn, but once I found out about the funding, the corruption, and his own selfish goals, it became clear to me, he is just one more person, looking to profit.

Research Justice4Fathers, the leader of that group (the origional group) abandon ship, once he saw just how far some men will go to "Win". This isn't a game. Children's lives are at stake. You have no idea what is really going on behind the scene, and to blame women for this, you are dead wrong.

There are far more "groups" of men, who program them into thinking that if they use the system, they will get custody. They have stopped thinking about the children and their best interests. You want to read an article...

http://www.everyman.org/articles/Ten_Reasons_Not_to_Fight_Custody_Battles.pdf

Father's rights, Mother's rights...Enough is enough. You all are forgetting that children have rights. If you don't treat your children right, they will hate you. If you force them to be with you for the small amount of time until they become adults, and they just don't want to be with you, they will hate you for the rest of their lives. This is not a game. The mother for this child, may have played the game, but she lost now didn't she? Father's will loose too, because they have made and funded a new war.

STOP THE FUNDING, AND JUST START BEING A GOOD PARENT.
and:
I agree. There is no protection for abused children in Family Law Courts. The origional post from the child unfortunately happened many years ago. Now things are different, and if you are a protective parent, like the poster #2, you will never be able to protect a child from abuse. Father or Mother, the courts will give custody to the parent who is abusing the child, only to profit. If the courts would listen to the children, the cases would move quickly, and the children's lives wouldn't be destroyed. BUT, to ignore child safety, the courts know that the protective parent, Father or Mother, will keep expecting truth and justice to prevai, guaranteeing many years of money rolling into the courts. I also agree about Glenn's group. He has lost sight of the real issues. He is jaded by financial gain, much as anyone who pits profit over protection. Why some parents feel that they have the "right" to abuse their children, is beyond me. Just look at the numerous different posts for Judges in Family Law, and they are all the same. People complaining that the Judges are corrupt, that the child is in danger and no one is presenting the evidence that one of the parents is abusive, or the courts will just ignore it. We need a reality check here in America. People are out of control, and there are parents abusing their children everywhere. Mr. Sacks seems to think that this is a falsehood, and only used by mother's. Then I have to ask, why are children dying at the hands of the parent? Why is there such a rise in Familicides? We see only a mere fraction of murders on t.v. because the reality is too harsh. People would rather ban together and save the polar bears.
and finally:
Wake up Grandma, that is the biggest load of c r a p. That is exactally what Glenn Sacks and Fathers rights groups want the world to think, ONLY for the purpose of making money. Glenn is not doing this for any other reason than to profit, and all those parents that support him or groups like his, are being manipulated.

Good father's, concerned father's, protective father's like post 2, don't have custody, BECAUSE they are trying to PROTECT A CHILD FROM ABUSE.

BUT that is no different from the thousands of protective mothers that are losing custody daily. You need to research, before you jump on the band waggon. Glenn's group has made ANY parent looking to say "MY CHILD IS BEING ABUSED" a liar. FATHER OR MOTHER. Therefore, the child will be placed with the abuser, so the court and their cohorts can profit. So can Glenn. Any parent can say, "alienation" to get away with abuse, and the courts say, "cool, we can run this case into the ground now".

You said it before, your ex daughter in law is abusive, and sounds like your son doesn't have custody. The reality for any protective parent, is that there is NO protection any more. The lies are a profit center.

NO CHILDREN ARE BEING PROTECTED FROM ABUSE. THIS IS MERELY A PROFIT CENTER FOR ANYONE WHO IS INVOLVED.

Courts are being paid by Father's rights groups, by minors counsels and others favorite appointees' to give custody to the abuser.
THAT'S IT. Period.

This has nothing to do with reuniting children with their fathers. It has nothing to do with getting to the bottom of an abuse allegation. This has nothing to do with truth and justice.

TRUTH WOULD BE LESS LUCRATIVE

Saturday

Psychiatry Aids Family Violence Perpetrators

We must dump the system of psychologists and psychiatrists, especially the one who make a living testifying in court. They are tools of abusers, pawning themselves off as friends of victims. They are shifting paradigms and creating social policy by infiltrating our legal and educational systems. (see Psychology and Parental Alienation: Closer to Science?)

You want your problems to go away? Call a shrink. He/she will give you whatever it is that you've been seeking. Psychology has long victimized people by pretending to understand humans better than humans understand themselves. Psychology doesn't allow self-reflection but rather re-frames people's thoughts around socially accepted dogma and ideas that aren't in their own best interest. Psychology may be the biggest brainwashing experiment ever invented.

From PsychDiagnosis.net:

(emphasis mine)

As a childhood [electro]shock survivor, whose mother was mentally murdered by [electro]shock (women have long been prime targets) it's impossible for me to communicate the depth of cruelty, arrogance and demonstrable criminal complicity of psychiatric shock pushers who have KNOWINGLY inflicted brain damaging treatments on unwitting patients/victims as a routine practice under fraudulent consent.

My mother (and, later, I) was "diagnosed" with "depression," as if we had some kind of short circuit or demons in our brains that caused irrational delusions of misery. The reality was that we had excellent reasons for being miserable: we lived with a brute (my father), who was emotionally and physically abusive to the entire family. My father hired a psychiatrist to "fix" us, which meant to suppress the overt symptoms of our discontent, so that my father could maintain the myth of his own normalcy. Since the psychiatrist was hired and paid by my father, he of course had a profound conflict of interest between his duty to his "patients" and his wallet. He chose to blame the victims.

We were subjected to [electro]shock “treatment.” My mother had dozens, later I had 6, when I was 15. It was the most unimaginably devastating catastrophe I've ever experienced. I've been picking up the pieces of my life ever since.

My mother (of 4 young boys) killed herself soon after her treatments. I understand completely why she did it, and I don't blame her. As for myself, instead of finishing the job the shrink started, I've been trying to make a life for myself while dragging around a lifeless child-corpse inside of me, as if my Siamese twin had died.

In a larger context… studies show that somewhere between 50 and 80% of psychiatric inmates have histories of domestic abuse victimization, and more than half have a diagnosis of "depression" (i.e. internalized oppression). Assuming a society-wide domestic abuse victimization rate of 20%, this means that domestic abuse victims are between 4 and 16 TIMES more likely to be committed than non-abused people.

If psychiatry was a science, it would be shouting this discovery from the rooftops and congratulating itself for finding a major cause of depression. But it's much more profitable to simply drug the victim and thus help to perpetuate the cause of the problem.


Since familial abusers tend to be the same people who initiate [psychiatric hospitalization] committal in a family, psychiatry's main business model seems to be to provide enforcement services to domestic abusers, while taking the abuse to a whole new level. So the "diagnosis" we received from the shrink turned out to be an economically self-serving rationalization for the status quo and a value judgment which placed the "man-of-the-house" rights of my father above the human rights of the rest of the family. The social pathology and misogyny implicit in all this should be self-evident. Research in the UK has shown that [what gets labeled] “Schizophrenia” among black people is strongly linked to social oppression rather than genetics. In short, it appears psychiatry has made a science of fraud and human rights abuse on a massive scale.

Friday

Brevard County: Judge John D. Moxley, Jr and Domestic Violence in Florida

UPDATED!! 2/13

Pay Attention!

Is it coming together yet?

Remember when Paul Martikainen kidnapped his son during a supervised visitation? The child's mother had previously requested multiple orders of protection from this man. Guess who was on the record as a judge?

Before that, remember the SWAT team standoff in which Christopher Lynch pointed a gun at his ex-wife held her and their two kids hostage? Domestic violence charges were not prosecuted. Restraining order dismissed. You won't believe what judge was on record?

Maybe you're catching on now?

(emphasis mine)

Judge's History Questioned After Stalker Murders Woman

BREVARD COUNTY, Fla. -- Eyewitness News has learned the judge who refused to give 23-year-old Alissa Blanton an injunction to protect her from her 61-year-old attacker has been accused of being easy on criminals in the past.

BILL SHEAFFER: Analysis Of Judge's Decision
READ: Victim's Injunction | Shooter's Emails
VICTIM PHOTOS: Pics Of Alissa Blanton, Husband

Blanton was targeted because she was young, beautiful and kind to the man who killed her. She asked a judge for an injunction to protect her from Roger Troy (read injunction), but Brevard County Circuit Judge John Dean Moxley didn't grant it. Troy murdered Alissa Blanton Monday at an east Orange County office complex.

Eyewitness News obtained a document from the Judicial Qualifications Commission that shows Judge Moxley is under review over a complaint made last month unrelated to the Blanton case.

Moxley is accused of, among other things, making a ruling in a case without thoroughly reviewing the case file.

[VICTIM PHOTOS Pics Of Alissa, Husband]

VICTIM PHOTOS
Pics Of Alissa, Husband
Moxley has been a member of the Florida Bar Association for 41 years and has been on the bench in Brevard County for 25 years. His disciplinary record with the Florida Bar and the judicial qualifications commission is clean, but the new complaint surfaced just two weeks before Blanton was gunned down as she returned from lunch with her husband at the AT&T call center near UCF.

Just days earlier, Moxley had refused to grant Blanton a petition for an emergency injunction to keep Troy away from her and her family, even though she provided nearly 70 pages of harassing emails Troy sent her (read emails). In one of the last ones, sent January 29, Troy said he had driven past her house and thought the color of it was ugly.

It is not the first time Judge Moxley has been accused of being too soft on crime.

“I like Moxley. He knows me. I got a problem, he'll take care of it,” career criminal Steven Lunn said in May 2003.

That same month, law enforcement officers told Eyewitness News it was because Judge Moxley had a history of going easy on nonviolent criminals.

STALKING: Crime In Spotlight After Murder
CONTACT COURT: Email District That Denied Victim

In February 2003, Eyewitness News reported how Moxley had let out violent criminal Derrick Henderson, on a signature alone, just days before he was to go to prison for six years and he disappeared.

In October 2002, Eyewitness News reported how Moxley lowered an accused child molester's bond so he could get out of jail after being accused of stalking 12- and 13-year-old girls.

Judge Moxley won't talk to Eyewitness News and won't say whether he's getting any protection right now after refusing to stop Roger Troy from leaving his Cocoa Beach condo to stalk Alissa Blanton.

Judge Moxley was most recently re-elected in 2008. His next term ends in 2015, but it’s unclear if he'll seek re-election. He makes $142,000 a year.

If you're going to investigate, don't limit it to Judge John D. Moxley, Jr. Begin with him and then open up the rest of the civil/family court files. HE IS NOT THE ONLY ONE! The fact that he has a "clean record" with the Judicial Qualifications Commissions (JQC) MEANS NOTHING. Most victims no nothing about lodging a JQC complaint. And the steps involved are very specific as you must quote the specific violation from the JQC list and provide evidence. The public at large doesn't have access to previous judicial complaints that were made with no resulting "punishment." And when the JQC does dish out "punishment" it is likely to be some sort of "public reprimand" that nobody really sees or hears about (unless it involves a prostitute). What do you expect from a group that operates in relative secrecy? Foxes guarding the henhouse.

Remember, domestic violence in the State of Florida is at an all time high. The Department of Children and Families (DCF) is incompetent. And government social services organizations, in combination with the family court system, are wrought with "officials" who support biased, victim-blaming notions that continue to put women and children in danger. Report to Fail and Fail to Report. Concepts such as parental alienation refocus the crimes from the criminal back to the victim(s), absolving the criminal of any wrongdoing and placing the burden of proving innocent of false allegations, on the victim.

In another news article, Judge Lisa Munyon from the Orange County Circuit Court says,
"But when it comes right down to it, it is a piece of paper and you have to have some other mechanism to ensure that that piece of paper is obeyed.
What, exactly, should that "other mechanism" be, Judge Munyon? Should victims take the law into their own hands because of the failures of the law enforcement and judges? Are victims responsible for their own trauma and deaths? Had Alissa Blanton NOT pursued a protective order and instead purchased a gun (refuse to be a victim) and killed her stalker, she would be painted as a crazy vindictive woman who wanted to get back at someone who was flattering her. She'd be alive, but in prison.

How many must die?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contacts: Rita Smith 303-839-1852 ext. 105

February 10, 2010 Kathleen Russell 415-250-1180

Family Courts Implicated in Infants’ Murders

Two Young Boys Killed by Two Divorcing Dads in Past 10 Days

Points to Massive System Failure

SAN RAFAEL- National and local advocacy groups are expressing outrage over what has become a disturbing national trend of divorcing Dads killing their children and themselves. 8-month-old baby Bekm was shot and killed by his father, Nicholas Bacon, in Meridian, Idaho just 48 hours ago, while 9-month-old baby Wyatt was killed by his father Stephen Garcia just ten days ago in San Bernardino County. Details are still emerging about the tragic Idaho murder-suicide of baby Bekm on Monday night.

In the Garcia case, three different judges refused multiple requests by the child’s mother for restraining orders to protect her child, despite police reports and documented death threats by the father in text messages and on Facebook.

“The system failed Wyatt Garcia and Katie Tagle,’’ said California Assemblymember Jim Beall, Jr., the lead sponsor of Assembly Bill 612, which aims to prevent the use of non-scientific theories in California family courts. “Wyatt’s tragic death was completely avoidable.

”

Numerous sources report a significant spike in murder suicides across the country by violent fathers who kill their children and themselves, frequently after mothers’ requests for protection of their children are denied by family court judges. In addition, the Leadership Council on Child Abuse & Interpersonal Violence estimates that more than 58,000 children per year in America are ordered by family courts into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce.

“The time has come for us as a society to speak out and put a stop to this growing national body count. Across the country, women and children are being killed because of judges’ personal biases and junk science that tells them to disbelieve women’s legitimate claims and evidence of abuse,” said Rita Smith, the Executive Director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

According to court transcripts and eyewitness accounts, judges reacted with disbelief when mother Katie Tagle presented them with evidence of death threats against her son by the father.

Judge David Mazurek stated, “I get concerned when there’s a pending child custody and visitation issue and in between that, one party or the other claims that there’s some violence in between. It raises the court’s eyebrows because based on my experience, it’s a way for one party to try to gain an advantage over the other,” he said.

“This attitude permeates the courts, that women are lying about the danger they are in,” said Kathleen Russell from the Center for Judicial Excellence. “This attitude causes judges to ignore tangible evidence of death threats and abuse. The abusers’ lobby has convinced judges that shared custody is always the answer, and sadly, this case points out how deadly that approach can be,” she said.

According to a family member who was in the courtroom when Ms. Tagle last sought protection for her son, the judge reportedly said, “One of you is lying, and I think it’s you,” while pointing at Katie. Transcripts from this hearing are not yet available.

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and the Center for Judicial Excellence are part of a growing national advocacy movement to educate the public as well as litigants, lawmakers, judges, and social service providers about the need for comprehensive family court reform. The Center for Judicial Excellence and their allies worked with California State Senator Mark Leno and others to pass an audit request through the state legislature last July. The California State Auditor is currently investigating the use of court appointees in family courts because of growing evidence that children are being harmed there. The California Legislature is slated to consider additional family court reform bills being presented by the Center and the California Protective Parents Association in the coming months.

“We must assess what’s happening in our family courts, and that’s why I’ve requested a state audit to take a hard look at the performance and effectiveness of the family court system,’’ said Assemblymember Beall.

The State Auditor’s report about the California Family Courts has an expected release date of June 2010.

***************

NCADV – The Mission of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) is to organize for collective power by advancing transformative work, thinking and leadership of communities and individuals working to end the violence in our lives.

CJE - The Center for Judicial Excellence (CJE) was established to improve the judiciary’s public accountability and strengthen and maintain the integrity of the courts. CJE has made a special commitment to protect the rights of children and other vulnerable populations in the courts.

##

California is trying to do something. How about Florida?

Anyone with information about Judge John D. Moxley, Jr. or any other Brevard County Judge, the time is now to come forward.

In the Best Interest of Her Child, Mother Loses Custody of Katrina Evacuee Son

Most parents want to do what is right for their children. But when does sacrifice constitute relinquishment?

Mother is a New Orleans police officer
When hurricane Katrina was approaching, mother's boyfriend evacuated her son (and other children) to Arkansas
Boyfriend is not the biological father of her son but had been assisting in the child caretaking
Mother and boyfriend end relationship before Katrina, but boyfriend continues to assist in caretaking while mother worked at night
Mother and ex-boyfriend lose their homes to Katrina
Mother must stay behind in New Orleans because of her job requirement
Mother attends 15 month nursing program and graduates
Mother retrieves children from Arkansas (Mother and boyfriend have two other children together)
Ex-boyfriend seeks custody of mother's son through the court system
Circuit court grants ex-boyfriend guardianship
Court of Appeals reverses circuit court's decision
Supreme court reverses again, back to ex-boyfriend

see article here

I'm confused though, what about the other two children? Were they returned? Were they requested?

This is why the Supreme Court gave the mother's son back to the ex-boyfriend:
[Mother] "made a conscious decision to delegate her parental responsibilities, duties and obligations to Mr. Scorza;” did not contribute significantly to the boy’s financial support; and only tried to retrieve him after Scorza stopped paying child support."
This reminds me of military child custody issues that are now getting attention..ie the active duty member goes overseas and parental duties are thus delegated to someone else...spouse, grandparent, etc. Duty calls...and military members are supposed to understand this upon enlistment. In fact, when I considered joining the military, I was told that I needed to give custody of my child to my parent because the military came first. And so, I didn't join the military.

Is it the same with law enforcement?

Let's reverse this:

Father leaves the marital or sexual home (LMFAO) where his children and their mother continue to reside. Father doesn't pay child support. Mother gets on welfare and is required to cooperate with child support enforcement (CSE) so that they can locate the father and collect funds. CSE, courtesy of the Administration of Children and Families, supports absent fathers in seeking joint custody of children that they may not have ever taken care of. Mothers are forced to share custody with nearly strange men, or mothers lose custody during protracted litigation.

Why doesn't this same Arkansas Supreme Court decision apply in these cases?

Again,
"made a conscious decision to delegate...parental responsibilities, duties and obligations...” did not contribute significantly to...financial support; and only tried to retrieve...after ....stopped paying child support.

How do you feel about this?

Thursday

Kid Kills Dad. Surely Another False Accusation and Parental Alienation on behalf of the Mother

Nothing surprises me these days. I used to think that all "delinquent" kids were just evil. Maybe some of them are, after a show I just watched on underage murderers. Maybe some of them inherit this dark side from one of their parents. But increasingly, I have begun to wonder if all these homeless youth, dropouts, thieves, and killers, are just abused kids. MRA groups would have you believe that these youth suffer from "fatherlessness"...whatever the fuck that means. But fatherlessness just ain't that simple. And inserting a dad, no they mean biological dad, isn't the fix-->note that many of these killers actually had two parent homes.

The killing kids are retaliating. We don't get to hear their stories very ofter, pre-homicide. Maybe they told their friends about how they were suffering, maybe they told the school counselor. What are their peers supposed to do about it? On the other hand, if the school counselor has information about abuse, he/she is a mandated reporter. But first he/she must believe. And second, he/she must have the courage to present the information. And last, once presented, things are beyond his/her control.

The system takes over, social services...CPS...and perhaps ultimately the court system. They are looking for someone to blame and this person is usually the mother, no matter the circumstance. But if the mother initiates this reporting, if she contacts the authorities, and by gawd if she asks for help through the system, she becomes the suspect anyway. The child's word is lost and the child must continue to fight to live. When, where and how can the child speak?

Sometimes, they speak like this:

Boy, 16, killed father

ALGONQUIN – Authorities aren’t discussing a motive, but court records allege a long, abusive past for a man who police said was shot to death Monday night by his 16-year-old son.

David Szalonek of 1461 Westbourne Parkway was charged with first-degree murder for the shooting death of Brian Szalonek, 51. David Szalonek is being held at the Kane County Juvenile Detention Facility on $2.5 million bail.

Algonquin police responded to the residence about 7:47 p.m. Monday for a report of a suspicious incident and found the victim, Brian Szalonek, dead of a gunshot wound.

According to court documents, more than one order of protection previously had been taken out by David Szalonek’s mother, Jerilyn, against the victim. In court documents, Jerilyn Szalonek accused her husband of physical abuse and withholding financial assistance to the family.

McHenry County court records showed that Jerilyn Szalonek sought orders of protection against her husband at least twice while the family was living in Lake in the Hills.

Both times, emergency orders of protection were granted, but the case was dismissed before a longer order was entered.

In 2004, Jerilyn Szalonek said her husband threw a candle at her and punched her in the head during an argument about a loan. Jerilyn Szalonek she took out the loan in her husband’s name after he refused to buy groceries and necessities for their three children, according to her request for an order of protection. She accused him of threatening to continue to beat her until the loan, which had a high interest rate, was paid, according to the request.

She also said that he had choked her and threatened her life in 1987 and hit her and threw a box of books at her in 1997. She wrote that he had counseling after both those incidents but resumed verbally and physically abusing her.

“My children have seen only a few things, but it’s enough for me to question my safety even when I am with him,” she wrote in 2004. “I need to be away from this man, and I need healing.”

Neighbors say the family has two other sons, one a second-grader and the other attending college.

According to one neighbor, it was not unusual to hear arguments at the house.

“In the summertime, we walk our dogs a lot, and during those walks, you could frequently hear yelling coming from the house’s open windows,” she said.

David Szalonek is enrolled at Jacobs High School as a freshman and has attended District 300 schools since seventh grade, District 300 spokeswoman Allison Strupeck said. Some neighbors said they thought that the boy had been home schooled.

“The preliminary investigation indicated that his peers were never in danger and that it was strictly a family-related situation,” the district said in a statement.

A phone message was sent to families of Jacobs students early Tuesday, and staff members are available to assist students who show signs of needing support.

Szalonek’s next court date is scheduled for Feb. 18.

• Northwest Herald reporter Jillian Duchnowski contributed to this report.



CASE ID 97OP000102
TITLE SZALONEK, JERILYN S. VS SZALONEK, BRIAN D.
CASE TYPE ORDER OF PROTECTION
STATUS CLOSED
STATUS DATE 06/10/1997
FILING TYPE PETITION
FILING DATE 06/10/1997



EVENT DATEROOMTYPEJUDGERESULT
07/01/1997C350HEARING - ORDER OF PROTECTIONPRATHER, SHARON L.DISMISSED - PREVIOUSLY DISPOSED


CASE ID 04OP000044
TITLE SZALONEK, JERILYN S VS SZALONEK, BRIAN D
CASE TYPE ORDER OF PROTECTION
STATUS CLOSED
STATUS DATE 02/05/2004
FILING TYPE ORDER OF PROTECTION
FILING DATE 02/05/2004



EVENT DATEROOMTYPEJUDGERESULT
02/18/2004C350HEARING - ORDER OF PROTECTIONGRAHAM, GORDON E.ENTERED - INTERIM ORDER PROTECTION
02/27/2004C350HEARING - ORDER OF PROTECTIONGRAHAM, GORDON E.ENTERED - INTERIM ORDER PROTECTION
03/26/2004C350HEARING - ORDER OF PROTECTIONGRAHAM, GORDON E.DISMISSED - PREVIOUSLY DISPOSED
03/26/2004C350MOTION - VACATE ORDER PROTECTIONGRAHAM, GORDON E.ALLOWED