You are on page 1of 5

Parental Alienation -Cover-up of a Foreseeable harm

Posted on December 22, 2013 Emotional and Psychological abuse is all about Power and Control. It is the misuse of that power and control where the abuse is defined. The Best Interest of the Child statute of Virginia was written to give Judges wide latitude in determining the presence of abuse in the family. Parental alienation is the abuse of power and control by the custodial parent and can be prevented. Parental alienation is not a mystery, and understanding domestic violence, abuse, and the dynamics of power and control are all that are required to prevent it. Dr. Samenow understood this and accurately refers to abusers as controllers.

High Conflict divorce is also not a mystery. All the research into High Conflict divorce shows that they are defined by the extensive litigation. Janet Johnston is the best known researcher of high conflict divorce and parental alienation. Her work dating back to the the 1990s shows that 80% of divorce cases are settled, either up front, or as the case moves through the process. Studies have found that only 20% of divorcing or separating families take the case to Court. Only 4-5% ultimately go to trial, with most cases settling at some point earlier in the process. Janet Johnston also found there to be a severe psychopathology in one or both parties, in high conflict divorces where visitation is litigated. My ex-wife has never even attempted to settle. My case has had over 50 hearings and I have been put in jail 4 times, at the request of my ex-wife. Her father was convicted of accomplice to murder, and the Court still has no psychological information about my ex-wife or her head injury. Domestic Violence is also almost always present in High Conflict Divorce. Peter Jaffe is one of the Worlds leading experts on children, domestic violence, and custody. The research used by Jaffe to support the claim that Domestic Violence is present in 75% of that 5% of Couples that actually go to trial. The research into Jaffes research is supported by multiple studies and very well documented. Children in the Crossfire: Child Custody Determinations Among Couples With a History of Intimate Partner Violence, Violence Against Women, Vol. 11, No. 8, August 2005, See more at: http://americanmotherspoliticalparty.org/ampp-article-library-family-court-custody-abusedv/1-research-articles-family-court-bias-custody-abuse-battered-moms/11-high-conflict-caseslikely-have-history-of-domestic-violence#sthash.5e6VnhXN.dpuf In 1997, The Virginia Commission on Domestic Violence Prevention conducted a study into Custody Cases. The study found that in custody cases where there was also a domestic abuse case in court, only 25% of the custody files referenced the existence of the domestic abuse case. So, of all the cases in Virginia that are high-conflict, about 50% of the domestic violence is not even considered by the Court in making Custody decisions. This is a systemic failure.

In my relationship, I had no power or control. My friends, family and everyone that knows me or my ex-wife and her family, knows that I had no power or control. Dr. Samenow was given the witnesses that would confirm the imbalance of power, control and money in the relationship. Dr. Samenow never contacted my psychiatrist or 5 other witnesses that were provided to verify the abuse of power in the relationship. I even provided Dr. Samenow with a signed release to speak to my psychiatrist who began treating me for depression and abuse, 2 years after my ex-wifes traumatic brain injury. The head injury was very serious and was also identified as a source of conflict in the relationship, in a deposition for the personal injury lawsuit. Dr. Samenow was also shown a ripped shirt that I had brought into his office, as evidence of domestic violence. My ex-wife had assaulted me, in front of our children, on January 19, 2008. She attacked me from behind as I tried to escape her anger. It all started when she woke me out of bed to help her find her keys, which were in my pants pocket on the floor. Before she woke me up, she had already taken my car keys. She was also already in a state. When I found her the keys the anger did not dissipate. After 8 years, my conditioned response, at this point, was to flee, not to fight. When I attempted to leave and go to the gym, I found my keys missing. She mockingly claimed she had no idea where the keys were and followed me around the house, as I looked. I wanted out of there, so I picked up a tray of her jewelry beads, and explained very calmly, as my children were right there, that if she gives me the keys, I wont turn over the tray. She didnt give me my keys to leave, so I overturned the tray and calmly grabbed another tray. I asked her a second time to for my keys and calmly turned over the second tray. My exwife flew into a rage and began hitting and scratching me from behind, ripping the shirt, I showed Dr. Samenow, from my body. The police found me behind a locked door with our children. When they were taken out, I broke down. This event is a microcosm of the dynamic of our relationship and this entire divorce and Dr. Samenow completely misrepresented it to the Court. My ex-wife would become irrational, use instrumental aggression and prevent me from escaping, I would then respond with an elevated reactive aggression. I am not proud of my reactions, but they were not the source of conflict. Just like our divorce. Here is what Dr. Samenow included in his report about the incident: Ms. Mackney spoke of her husbands explosive nature in citing a particular incident in which Mr. Mackney became upset and scattered her jewelry materials all over the room. This was after an argument which had eventuated in each taking the others keys. He took the drawers out and threw the jewelry thousands of dollars worth of jewelry. There were two trays sorted by size. He dumped both of these. I was trying to stop him. I called the police. He was going to delete my work files on the computer. Dr. Samenow failed to include the Domestic Violence of my ex-wife. I was the one to call the police on her, and I threatened to delete her work files because her father took the shirt, I brought in to show him as evidence. My nature is also not explosive, as anyone has known me or dated me would tell you. I have no history of violence or aggression in my relationships. None. Dr. Samenow also withheld my reports of my ex-wife attacking me on our honeymoon, while I was driving our rental car.

Judge Bellows became aware that there was evidence of domestic violence, that Dr. Samenow left all of it from his report, in April 2009. Dr. Samenow was paid by my ex-wife as a witness to testify after Dr. Zuckerman had testified that there was no reason why I should not have access to my children. Dr. Samenow got on the stand and I pulled out the shirt and asked him under oath if he had seen the shirt before. He admitted that I brought it into his office to show him, but there is no reference to it in his report. The legal profession and the psychological profession are failing to protect children from a foreseeable harm, by ignoring the dynamics of power and control and the presence of Domestic Violence. The Courts who are responsible for managing the conflict and are beholden on the Psychological professionals and forensic evaluators to understand the conflict. The law empowers Judges to also obtain information about the conflict through other methods, such as Guardian Ad Litems, Parenting Coordinators, and Court Appointed Special Advocates. The Law, as written, empowers Judges to protect children from parental alienation. They have the tools at their disposal to determine the presence of abuse. Judge Bellows knew there was domestic violence and that Dr. Samenow failed to report it. Two months later, he held me in contempt of court and took away visitation with my children for not including a receipt, when I faxed a copy of a lease to my ex-wifes attorney. Judge Bellows covered up for the fraud of Dr. Stanton Samenow and failed to protect children from a foreseeable harm, especially when you read all the motions that were filed with the Court that he denied. Judge Bellows chose to protect the professional reputation of Dr. Samenow and Judge Ney over protecting children from abuse. Judge Bellows was the Judge in another case where Dr. Samenow testified as a witness for the Commonwealth and was also accused of not documenting the facts accurately.

What my ex wife and her family did was what the female victims of psychopaths call Lovefraud, after Donna Andersens book. Women who are used by male psychopaths feel tricked into the relationships after realizing the guy they love never really cared. In my case, I was the breeder. My ex wife and her parents wanted children and the murder of Sam Degelia would scare any guy away. I was fooled for my genes. Now they are keeping me from them, because I saw behind the mask. The patterns of behavior of male and female sociopaths all stem from the absence of empathy, guilt, shame, remorse. They fake it really well around people of value to them. The people of no value to them will see the pattern, because they dont hide it with them. This article is from the mothers perspective who has custody of the children. It accurately describes the chaos of co-parenting with someone with a pathological need for control. Read it all.

So, a real crucial moment in the course of this case was when I was held in contempt of Court for not sending a copy of a receipt. It was in April 2010. This was over a year and a half after the divorce began. Judge Bellows had heard from my psychological evaluator, Dr. William Zuckerman, that I was telling the truth and that there was no reason why I should not see my children, despite my ex-wifes baseless request. Mind you, that Judge Bellows had ordered the Psychological evaluation for me, after Dina had requested something he had never been requested before. and now she was asking that I lose overnight visitation (which her false accusations caused) again, as her solution for not sending a copy of a receipt. My ex-wife had asked the Court to deny me all visitation with our children, with no allegations of abuse. Judge Bellows even decides to give them wide latitude? It is gross negligence for the Judge to give a mother wide latitude to take away visitation without allegations or evidence of abuse. The Virginia Statute declaring Parental Rights requires strict scrutiny, as it is a fundamental right:

A parent has a fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parents child.
1-240.1. Rights of parents.

So, I got my evaluation and the doctor couldnt find any psychological reason to deny visitation (because there were none). Judge Bellows had no choice but to reinstate visitation to what had been previously agreed before Dinas request that all visitation be denied. So after 6 months of being kept from my children by Judge Bellows, I was to have overnights again with my children for the first time in over a year, over Easter weekend. My ex-wifes attorney asks for a copy of the lease as a precondition before I am able to resume visitation. So, Judge Bellows says in Court and specifically whats required is a receipt documenting receipt of payment for the deposit and first months rent. He says this on March 17th 2010. Judge Bellows also orders that I am to fax this receipt by April 1st to my ex-wifes attorney. However, Judge Bellows orders that my ex-wifes attorney does not have to send me a written copy of the order requiring the fax until April 2nd, the day after I am to send the fax. So, I was going from memory about what I was supposed to send and when. If I had a written copy of the order, I would have done exactly as instructed. So, on April 1st, I fax over a copy of my lease, documenting receipt of payment and rent. My ex-wifes attorney then informs me that I have violated the Judges order by not sending a lease and a copy of this receipt, despite the fact that the lease contains all the same information on the receipt. Any real estate lawyer would also accept a signed copy of a lease as a receipt for payment. It was a gotcha game and Judge Bellows played the role perfectly. My ex-wife denied me overnight visitation with my children and then filed to have me held in contempt of Court. At the hearing, my ex-wife testified that she handed me a note informing me that the Children were sick. She then testified that she and her father, who was there because she claims she was so afraid, saw me crumple up the note and throw it out the window onto the lawn. This was a complete and total lie, as I brought the note to Court that day and provided the Court the note in pristine, uncrumpled condition. I never crumpled the note and I never through it out the window. I held onto the note and waited for her to come back or to bring me the children. It was all a ruse, to simply keep me from obtaining visitation. Cash for kids.

My ex-wifes motion states that she also drove to the home where I was living on Easter Sunday (the day after she claims she was so afraid of me) to gather evidence and take pictures for the upcoming hearing. Judge Bellows was told that I was going from memory and that the fax of the lease communicated all the information requested. Nevertheless, Judge Randy Bellows found me in contempt of Court and took away overnight visitation with my children, as per the transcript of the exchange. When I objected to the fact that he was taking away visitation because I failed to send a copy of the receipt, which had nothing to do with my children, I became very frustrated and upset. So then Judge Bellows then took away all visitation, simply because I forgot to send a copy of a receipt in a fax. When I tried to explain that taking away visitation is harming my children, Judge Bellows just got up and walked out. In June 2010, Judge Bellows made his final orders that I was to have no physical or telephone visitation with my children, not for any abuse, or psychological reason or because I was abusing my ex-wife or our children. My children were used by Judge Bellows as punishment for being held in Contempt of Court, at the request of my ex-wife. Judge Bellows simply chose to believe that my reactions to being bullied and abused by the legal system was the source of conflict and willfully chose to ignore all evidence suggesting that my ex-wife was merely trying to deny all access to my children.