The Alienated Estranged British Parents Welfare Child Parents Snatch Block Access– Reform Bill page 5 Own Kids Face Fines page 22 page 11 page 17 Summer 2002, Vol. 17, No. 2 page 23 $3.95 SpeakOutChildren’s Rights Council forChildren THIS MAGAZINE IS FOR DIVORCED, SEPARATED, SINGLE, NEVER-MARRIED PARENTS AND THE PROFESSIONALS WHO SERVE THEM 14 ISSN 1042-3559 9 771042 355007 4USFOHUIFOZPVS SFMBUJPOTIJQXJUIZPVS DIJMESFOXJUI"DUJWF 1BSFOUJOH±POMJOF
!CTIVE 0ARENTING 4ODAY /NLINE 'ROUPS IS A VIDEO THE VIDEO ON #$ 2/- 9OU CAN LOG ON AND hATTENDv BASED DISCUSSION PROGRAM THAT hMEETSv OVER THE EACH SESSION ANY TIME ITS CONVENIENT DURING EACH )NTERNET $ESIGNED FOR PARENTS OF CHILDREN AGES WEEK DAY OR NIGHT TO THIS SESSION COURSE COMBINES ENTERTAINING 9OULL EXCHANGE QUESTIONS AND IDEAS WITH YOUR VIDEO WITH ONLINE ACTIVITIES GROUP DISCUSSION AND CERTIlED LEADER AND OTHER PARENTS IN YOUR GROUP VIA READING %ACH GROUP IS LED BY A CERTIlED PARENTING THE GROUP BULLETIN BOARD AND DURING A WEEKLY REAL EDUCATION LEADER TIME ONLINE CHAT
#VJMEB¾SNGPVOEBUJPOUPDBSSZZPVUISPVHI +PJOBDMBTTUPEBZ UIFUFFOZFBST 4O JOIN IN THE NEXT !CTIVE 0ARENTING /NLINE 'ROUP !CTIVE 0ARENTINGS POPULAR !CTIVE 0ARENTING 4ODAY ALL YOU NEED ARE A COMPUTER WITH A #$ 2/- DRIVE PROGRAM HAS HELPED MILLIONS OF PARENTS IN THE PAST ACCESS TO THE )NTERNET AND THE MATERIALS WE PRO YEARS AND IS NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR THE lRST VIDE 3EE OUR WEB SITE FOR TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS TIME !04S POWERFUL COMMUNICATION AND DISCI #OST OF THE COURSE IS FOR ONE PARENT PLINE SKILLS WILL HELP YOU BUILD TRUST AND COOP EACH FOR TWO PARENTS SH 9OU WILL RECEIVE #$ ERATION WITH YOUR CHILDRENA REAL PLUS AS THEY 2/-S CONTAINING THE COURSE MATERIALS AND GROW OLDER /VER THE COURSE OF SESSIONS YOU WILL MINUTES OF VIDEO A 0ARENTS 'UIDE AND ACCESS TO EXPLORE THE ONLINE SEGMENTS OF THE COURSE s DIFFERENT STYLES OF PARENTING s EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION SKILLS &OR MORE INFORMATION OR TO REGISTER PLEASE GO TO s HANDLING ANGER AND CONmICT WWW!CTIVE0ARENTINGCOMADCRC s DISCIPLINE TECHNIQUES THAT WORK s WHY CHILDREN MISBEHAVE AND HOW TO REDIRECT THEM s DISCOURAGING DRUG AND ALCOHOL USE s HOW TO BUILD COURAGE IN YOUR CHILD
)PXEPFTBOPOMJOFQBSFOUJOHQSPHSBNXPSL %ACH OF THE SESSIONS FOCUSES ON DIFFERENT PARENT ING ISSUES 9OULL READ A CHAPTER IN THE BOOK AND GO THROUGH THE INTERACTIVE PROGRAM ONLINE WATCHING
XXX"DUJWF1BSFOUJOHDPNBEDSD ❙ columns 4 editor’s message OFFICERS AND BOARD MEMBERS David L. Levy, J.D., President and CEO 15 court cases John L. Bauserman, Jr., J.D., Chairman Samuel A. Brunelli 24 research John L. Bauserman, Sr. Terry Cady 27 catalog of resources Teresa L. Kaiser, J.D. GENERAL COUNSEL Michael L. Oddenino, Arcadia, CA DIRECTOR OF CHILD ACCESS SERVICES Alfred Ellis DEPARTMENTS ASSISTANT DIRECTORS Margaret Wuwert—Midwest Mark Roseman—Eastern 16 Letters to the Editor Features DIRECTOR OF INFO4PARENTS WEBSITE Lonnie Perrin, Sr., former NFL football player for Denver Broncos, 14 Family Facts Chicago Bears and Washington Redskins The Alienated OFFICE MANAGER 11 Around the Country Julie Maggiacomo Carrera and The World Child: Do We Need CHILD SPOKESPERSON Hadassah Luther, age 13, National Young Musician Award Winner 17 U.S. and Abroad a Reformulation GRANDPARENT SPOKESPERSONS Ernie Ashworth, member, Grand Ole Opry, and Bettye Ashworth 19 Practical Advice on of Parental NATIONAL SPOKESPERSONS Family Matters Gerald A. Boarman, Ed.D., Academic Education Alienation Elizabeth Hickey, M.S.W., Author, Parent Education 22 Bills in Congress Syndrome (PAS) Jayne A. Major, Ph.D., Breakthrough Parenting Hon. David Gray Ross, former Commissioner, Federal Child 25 Book Reviews page 5 Support Office and former Judge Joseph Seldner, Writer and Speaker 30 National Affiliate Dwight Twilley, Pop Singer/Writer Organizations and Audrey Wise, Ed.D., M.A., Family Counselor/Mediator Estranged Parents Chapters EVALUATORS OF RESEARCH Snatch Own Kids in John Guidubaldi, D.Ed. D. Richard Kuhn ‘Abduction FAMILY ADVISORY BOARD ADVISORS Rabbi Mendel Abrams, M.Min., former President, Board of Rabbis Coming Next Issue Friendly’ Japan of Greater Washington, D.C. page 11 Eloise Anderson, The Claremont Institute, Sacramento, California Why U.S. Soldiers in David Birney, Actor, Santa Monica, California Afghanistan Can Get a Hon. Sherwood Boehlert, U.S. Congressman (R-NY) Break on Child Support Jim Cook, President, Joint Custody Association, Los Angeles, California British Parents “Dear Abby” (Abigail Van Buren), Los Angeles, California The Medicine Hat Model: Karen DeCrow, Former President of N.O.W., Jamesville, New York Collaborative Law in Canada Who Block Access Elliott H. Diamond, Co-Founder, CRC, Reston, Virginia Why Four Hidden Tax Face Fines Phyllis Diller, Comedienne, Los Angeles, California Advantages for Sole Custody Margorie Engel, Ph.D., President, Stepfamily Association of America page 17 Larry Gaughan, J.D., Professional Director, Family Mediation of Parents are Under Attack Greater Washington, D.C. Three Child-Focused Governors Hon. Bob Graham, U.S. Senator (D-FL) Who Pushed Co-Parenting Ron Haskins, Ph.D., Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution; Welfare Reform former Staff Director, House Human Resources Subcommittee Jennifer Isham, President, Mothers Without Custody (MW/OC), Bill Crystal Lake, Illinois page 22 Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, M.D., Author, Psychiatrist, Scottsdale, Arizona Cover photo: (L. to R.) Lynne Oxhorn- Vicki Lansky, Author/Columnist, Deephaven, Minnesota Ringwood and Louise Oxhorn, the CRC is a member of James Levine, The Fatherhood Project, The Family and Work CoMamas, whose long-awaited book Institute, New York, New York entitled “Step-Wives” was just pub- lished by Simon and Schuster. This Hon. Debbie Stabenow, U.S. Senator (D-MI) excellent book shows how mothers Hon. Fred Thompson, U.S. Senator (R-TN) and step-mothers can learn to get Judith S. Wallerstein, Ph.D., Founder, Center for the Family in along for the sake of the child. Transition, Corte Madera, California The book may be ordered from amazon.com, Simon and Schuster, PUBLISHER Barnes and Noble, and CRC. See the The Children’s Rights Council booklist in this issue and on the CRC 300 “I” Street, NE, Suite 401, Washington, D.C. 20002 website at www.gocrc.com/booklist. phone: 202/547-6227, fax: 202/546-4272, email: [email protected] Contact CoMamas at feelgood@ #1513 websites: www.gocrc.com and www.info4parents.com, comamas.com
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 3 The Children’s Rights Council (CRC) is an interna- ❙❙ editor’s message tional, non-profit IRS 501(c) (3) children’s rights organi- zation, based in Washing- ton, D.C. ounce of prevention is worth a pound MISSION of cure. The ounce of prevention is good • The Children’s Rights parenting. Good parenting can prevent Council (CRC) is an interna- the worst of the problems you or other tional non-profit organiza- children have experienced. tion committed to the lov- How many of us have had good ing, nurturing, protecting parenting? Does parenting come natu- and education of children rally? Yes, for zebras, elephants and through both parents and birds. But humans have to learn parent- extended family. ing skills. They learn it from their own • CRC is dedicated to help- parents (if they have good role models), There is a wide audience for “Speak Out for Children.” ing children in promoting or from other parents in the community. family formation, shared For those who are divorced, separated, Besides people interested in fostering and sustain- parenting, mediation, par- or never-married, books by Vicki ent education, and miti- Lansky, Elizabeth Hickey, Mike Odde- ing marriage, readers include our “niche” audience gating the effects of di- nino, Jayne Major, Dean Tong, Richard vorce and relationship Warshak and others, can help moms and of divorce. breakups of children and dads get through the divorce without parents. David L. Levy, J.D., President, CRC walking over the kids. These books are available at www.gocrc.com. Govern- VISION ment agencies have spent huge efforts • CRC’s vision is a society There are 280 million Americans, in- on pulling victims of abuse, crime and where both parents play a cluding about 18 million children of di- drugs “out of the water” to safety, as any significant parenting role vorce under age 18. Millions more are compassionate society would do. in their children’s lives. adult children of divorce, and many are But isn’t it about time we went back Children need grand- children of never-married parents. In upstream, and found out who was parents, step-parents, and fact, nearly half the population fit into throwing these people into the water? others who are part of the one of those categories. Government and social welfare agen- family fabric, working as a You are not numbers. You have expe- cies, preferably with the aid of local non- team. rienced or are experiencing a major life profits, must begin to emphasize and • CRC envisions a society change—often painful—and many fund parenting education. where laws, attitudes, and times with long-range consequences. Parents must ensure that they are not public opinion affirm that Your parents’ divorce or lack of mar- intentionally or unintentionally alienat- for children, “The Best Par- riage increased the chances of your ex- ing their child from the other parent, a ent is Both Parents.” periencing emotional or psychological featured topic inside this issue of “Speak STRENGTHENING pain and blaming yourself for family Out for Children.” As CRC General Coun- FAMILIES THROUGH problems. It also increased feelings of sel Mike Oddenino has said, “When you EDUCATION AND isolation or loneliness, fear of “losing” look in your child’s face, see the face of ADVOCACY a parent, difficulty in forming new rela- the other parent. If you do that, you can Formed in 1985 by con- tionships, temptations to commit behav- never abuse your child by setting the cerned parents who had ior that would hurt you, your family, and child against the other parent.” more than 40 years collec- the community. That’s part of good parenting, which tive experience in custody Too often, you didn’t have someone can lead to a host of benefits. reform and early child- to talk to, or services or programs that Parent education is best learned be- hood education, CRC has would help you. fore marriage, but it is often needed dur- chapters in 32 states and Of course, problems occur even dur- ing marriage, and if separation occurs, four national affiliate orga- ing marriage, but problems are more parents have to learn a whole new way nizations: Mothers Without likely to become serious when there is of conducting their lives. Custody (MW/OC), The separation or divorce. Parent education includes sex educa- Stepfamily Association of The Children’s Rights Council has tion, but goes far beyond it, to include America (SAA), CoMamas, existed since 1985 to help families ex- the entire scope of day to day and long and Parenting Coalition In- periencing these problems. We have range activities concerning the children. ternational, Inc. worked to change laws and attitudes. Tell us how you learned good paren- Prominent professionals CRC tasks include: ting—especially if divorce was in the pic- in the fields of religion, law, • Offering parenting tips and refer- ture. The three best descriptions (500 social work, psychology, rals to hundreds of support groups words or less) will be published in the child care, education, busi- across the country at our parenting next issue of “Speak Out for Children.” ness, and government website, www.info4parents.com; If any teenage children want to tell us comprise our Family Advi- • Offering more than 100 books on how you helped your family “straighten sory Board. family topics on our other website out,” we will publish that, too. at www.gocrc.com; If we can help even a few families here ASSISTING CHILDREN Federal and state agencies have fo- and there, it will be a start. OF SEPARATED, cused a great deal of attention and DIVORCED, SINGLE, money on abuse, neglect, crime and pov- AND NEVER-MARRIED erty (as well they should), but remem- PARENTS ber what your parents told you? An
4 WWW.GOCRC.COM The July 2001 issue of Family Court Review (for- merly Family and Concili- ation Courts Review), drew the most interest of any issue of the Review in the four years since he The Alienated Child became its editor, says Andrew Schepard. The issue, published Do We Need a Reformulation of by the AFCC—an asso- ciation of family, court Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) and community profes- sionals, was entirely on Alienated Children in Di- vorce. The leading article was entitled “The Alien- ated Children: A Refor- mulation of Parental Alienation Syndrome” by Dr. Joan B. Kelly, Ph.D., and Janet Johnston, Ph.D. Because the authors were critical of Richard A. Gardner, M.D., who popu- larized the concept of the Parental Alienation Syn- drome (PAS), CRC thought it fair to obtain his re- sponse. We planned to present a roughly equal size presentation of the respective views. CRC asked permission to print about 20 percent of the 8,500 word Kelly/ YES... NO... Johnston article, which would approximate the Joan B. Kelly, Ph.D., and Dr. Richard A. Gardner Gardner response. However, Dr. Kelly, Janet Johnston, Ph.D. Gardner, clinical professor of child psy- whom CRC highly re- spects as a researcher Kelly is a clinical and research psychol- chiatry, Columbia University College of and advocate for children, said “no.” She wanted ogist who has published extensively in Physicians and Surgeons, is the author people to read the entire Family Court Review, the area of divorce, child’s adjustment, of 50 books on child and family issues. which contains several articles besides the one custody, access, and mediation. authored by Kelly and Response to Johnston. There is no way Johnston is a professor at San Jose Kelly/Johnston Article “Speak Out for Children” My primary reaction to the Kelly/ could print all that, as State University, author, and Executive Johnston article was that the authors do worthy as it would be to not appreciate that if the notions they read it. Information on Director, Judith Wallerstein Center for promote in this article are taken seri- how to obtain the en- ously, they are contributing significantly tire issue is provided on the Family in Transition. to the weakening of women’s positions page 6. in courts of law. Without permission to By denying and/or discrediting the reprint a sizeable portion CRC Review of the PAS, they are depriving mothers who are of the article, we decided Kelly/Johnston Article victims of their husband’s PAS indoc- instead to print a review The authors note that alienation of a trination (an increasingly frequent phe- of the article. We use child from a parent following separation nomenon) of the most powerful weapon Kelly and Johnston’s and divorce has drawn considerable at- they can possibly use in a court of law words as much as pos- tention in custody disputes for more to defend themselves. The husband’s sible in order for readers than two decades and, more recently, lawyer will defend a father accused of to clearly understand has generated considerable legal, psycho- being a PSA indoctrinator by saying: their position. Gardner’s logical and media-based controversy. “Your honor, everyone agrees that these response, written spe- The authors note that Richard children are alienated. All you have to cially for “Speak Out for Gardner, M.D., described the PAS as a do is listen to the children, and it will Children,” is printed in his child’s campaign of denigration against be obvious that they are alienated from own words. Continued on page 6 Continued on page 8
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 5 Feature
YES... presses, freely and persistently, unrea- Continued from page 5 sonable negative feelings and beliefs The entire article by Kelly and (such as anger, hatred, rejection and/or Johnston, as well as other ar- a parent that has no justification. They fear) toward a parent that are signifi- ticles on the subject, may be further state the following: cantly disproportionate to the child’s seen on Lexus/Nexus, Westlaw, actual experience with that parent. • Gardner says the indoctrinating and in some research libraries. And here, in CRC’s view, is their cen- parent is usually the mother and For a copy ($29), contact Sage that false allegation of sexual abuse tral insight: Publications, 2455 Teller Road, is common; If we focus on the child, professionals • PAS has focused almost exclusively involved in the custody dispute may Thousand Oaks, CA 91320, on the alienating parent, but this is find that that there are normal, real- phone 800/818-SAGE, or email not supported by considerable clini- istic, and or developmentally ex- order@sagepub,com. Sage’s cal research that shows that in high- pected reasons why youngsters resist website, www.sagepub.com, conflict divorce, many parents deni- visits with a parent; parents who does not allow you to view the grate the other parent, but only a question the value of visitation are articles. small number of children become not necessarily alienating parents. The articles, all of which ap- alienated; Reasons for resistance to visitation pear in Family Court Review, Vol. • In other cases, children (especially may stem from high-conflict marriage, 39(3) are: adolescents) develop unjustified resistance to a parent’s parenting style, Kelly, J.B. & Johnston, J.R. The animosity or fear of a parent in the e.g., rigidity, anger or insensitivity to alienated child: A reformulation absence of alienation by the other children, or resistance because of the of parental alienation syndrome, parent. Hence, alienation by a par- child’s concern about an emotionally pages 249-266. ent is not a sufficient condition for fragile custody parent. The authors be- Lee, S.M. & Oleson, N.W. (2001). a child to become alienated; lieve the courts would be better served Assessing for alienation in child • Because there is no commonly rec- by a description of the child’s behavior custody and access evaluations, ognized pathogenesis, course, famil- in the context of his or her family. pages 282-298. They recommend that America think ial pattern, or treatment for PAS, it Sullivan, M.J. & Kelly, J.B. (2001). in terms of the illustration in Figure 2 cannot be considered a diagnostic Legal and psychological man- syndrome as defined by the Ameri- (below). agement of cases with an alien- can Psychiatric Association (1994); Figure 2 shows various factors that • If PAS is “a grouping of signs and may be involved to explain the child’s ated child, pages 299-315 symptoms, based on their frequent negative behavior against a parent. Even Johnston, J.R., Walters, M.G., co-occurrence,” it could be consid- if the child is not alienated, a number of & Friedlander, S. (2001). Thera- ered a non-diagnostic syndrome, these factors during separation and di- peutic work with alienated chil- but this sheds no light on cause, vorce may place the child at risk for dren and their families, pages prognosis, and treatment; alienation in the future. Preventive ac- 316-333 • Hence, the term PAS does not add tion may need to be taken. Williams, R.J. (2001). Should any information that would en- Extremely negative views of the re- judges close the gate on PAS & lighten the court and professionals, jected parent, such as “She never wanted PA?, pages 267-281. which would be better served by a you,” “I was your real parent,” “You call Zirogiannis, L. (2001), pages description of the child’s behavior me if your dad touches you anywhere,” 334-343. in the context of his or her family; “I’m sure he’ll be late as usual,” erode • Many of Gardner’s publications the child’s confidence in and love for the have been self-published and do not have the scrutiny of peer reviewers; • Gardner’s view that an alienating parent is the principle if not the sole cause of the problem leads to his radical recommendations, such as changing custody to the “hated” parent, as well as the child’s deten- tion in juvenile facilities and/or the jailing or fining of the offending parent; • Testimony about PAS has been barred in some courtrooms, and contains an overly simplistic focus on the brainwashing parent. The PAS theory is frequently misap- plied. For all these reasons there is a critical need to produce a more useful conceptualization than PAS. Courts’ Focus Should Change Kelly and Johnston recommend that courts focus on the alienated child rather than on the parental alienation. They define an alienated child as one who ex- Figure 2.
6 WWW.GOCRC.COM Feature
YES... Continued from page 6 SpeakOut for rejected parent. Such comments cre- but even if they did, as Kelly and Children ate intolerable confusion, and may Johnston noted, it would not justify constitute emotional child abuse. the disproportionately negative treat- Some rejected parents may have ment they have received. We are talk- Speak Out for Children is published four contributed to the alienation, but ing about parents who have not seen times a year by the Children’s Rights these rejected parent’s behaviors their children in 6 months, one year, Council, Inc. Editor: David L. Levy. Con- do not by themselves warrant the five years or longer. Most of these tributors to this issue: Julie Maggia- disproportionately angry response parents appear to be sensitive, caring, como Carrera, Paul Robinson, Mark of the child nor the refusal to have support paying and still involved— Roseman, Ken Skilling, and college stu- contact. going to graduation exercises, attend- dent intern Meghann Ellis, University of Their parental involvement and ca- ing school events, and even volun- Connecticut. Design and layout: Elsie pacities were generally within a nor- teering at a school, in order to Smith, Design Solutions Plus. mative range but might have become occasionally get a peek at their alien- Material in this newsletter authored compromised by the marital conflict, ated child. by CRC may be reprinted without per- the divorce disputes, and the child’s Saying all that, mission, provided the source (“Re- problematic response. CRC thinks that the new formu- printed from ‘Speak Out for Children’ “) Kelly and Johnston conclude that lation by Kelly and Johnston is given. For non-CRC material, obtain no one factor produces the alienated makes sense. It strikes us an im- permission from the copyright owner. child. A full understanding of this provement in analysis to start “Family Facts” may be photocopied pathological development can lead to with a focus on the child rather for distribution to policymakers and an effective plan aimed at resolving than on the alienating parent. judges. the profound alienation of the child In fact, CRC has said this to two For further information about CRC from the parent. reporters who called us in the past membership, publications, cassettes, The Children’s Rights Council few months for a reaction to the new catalog, and services, write: CRC, 300 “I” View Kelly/Johnston formulation. Street N.E., Suite 401, Washington, D.C. On the other hand, CRC thinks it Thousands of people have contacted 20002; phone 202/547-6227; fax 202/ is clear that the Parental Alienation the Children’s Rights Council over 546-4CRC (4272). Syndrome exists. An alienating the years, with complaints of alien- CRC has two websites. The main CRC parent’s programming of a child into site is at www.gocrc.com and for ex- ation. Many times the parents do not a verbal attack on the other parent is even know there is a concept such as panded parenting information go to too widespread a practice not to be “Parental Alienation” or the “Par- info4parents.com. CRC’s email ad- believed. And Gardner has accurately dress is [email protected]. ental Alienation Syndrome,” but they attributed other reasons for alien- know they have been cut out of their ation than a parent’s wrongdoing. SUBSCRIPTION child’s life, they believe the other par- INFORMATION Gardner has written that a parent’s ent has instituted this alienation, and poor parenting skills, angry attitude Annual subscription is $18.00. Indi- they seek help. towards a child, or other factors may vidual copy, $3.95 at your bookstore or The noted author Gail Sheehy be reasons why a child is rejecting local newsstand. Free to CRC members. coined a term for these parents. She that parent. Membership is $35 a year. Library Rate: said in a New York Times article June $18 a year. Individual and subscription Rejection comes in many forms. 21, 1998, that these were “deadbolted “Holidays seem to magnify the prob- copies are 6,000. Readership exceeds dads,” dads who were pushed out of lems of rejection,” said CRC member 25,000. their children’s lives. She could just Randy Morkved of Pennsylvania, as well have added, as custody has EDITORIAL POLICY “because this is a time when the shifted slightly towards dads in recent Letters, comments and articles are wel- alienating parent wants the children come. Send to Editor, CRC. Publisher re- years, that dads are as capable of all to herself and her family. The chil- alienation as mothers, that there are serves the right to approve for content. dren suffer from not being with both “deadbolted moms,” as well. Advertising inquiries welcome through parents.” Morkved did not see his son The parents who contact CRC do publisher. Danny at all during the first 18 not of course allude to their own pos- months of the baby’s life. ■ ADVERTISING sible deficiencies in parenting styles, Media kit requests and advertising questions should be made to Mark Roseman, 48 Shepards Knoll Drive, Beat the Tax Man: Change of Address Hamden, CT 06514, phone/fax: 203/ Contribute to Children’s Please notify CRC three weeks in ad- 288-7827, email: [email protected] vance of any address change. Rights Council Send your old and new addresses to CRC appreciates everyone who desig- CRC, 300 “I” Street N.E., Suite 401, © 2002, Children’s Rights Council, Inc. nates CRC in the annual Combined Fed- Washington, D.C. 20002 or email us at ISSN 1042-3559 eral Campaign. We also appreciate ev- [email protected]. Summer 2002, Vol. 17, No. 2 eryone who responded to our Holiday Change of addresses may take up to Appeal for Funds. A non-profit organi- six weeks, so please notify us as soon Errata: The Spring 2002, Vol. 17, No. 1 zation like CRC depends on contribu- as possible. was not published. tions like yours. Thank you.
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 7 Feature
NO... Continued from page 5
their mother because of her neglect becoming alienated from a parent. the point of being almost meaning- and abuse. The mother is claiming PAS is just one subtype of parental less. A syndrome is used to make a that she is the victim of the father’s alienation, a subtype that involves an proper diagnosis. If the PAS cluster PAS indoctrination. Your honor, PAS alienating parent’s programming a is not a syndrome, then it cannot be is a discredited and defunct theory. child into a campaign of denigration used to make a diagnosis. Accord- Here is an article by Kelly and against the other parent, who is usu- ingly, there is no such thing as a Johnston that confirms this.” ally loving and dedicated. nondiagnostic syndrome. It does not PAS Now More Widely speak well of the authors to use an Recognized oxymoron in a scientific paper. The authors claim that the PAS The authors lead the reader to believe sheds no light on cause, prognosis, that the PAS is not to be found in and treatment. It is not necessary for DSM-IV (1994) because “there is no PAS is a syndrome the name of a disorder—whether it commonly recognized or empirically be a syndrome or any other label for versified pathogenesis, course, famil- the disorder—to shed light on the ial pattern, or treatment selection.” cause, prognosis, and treatment of the First, PAS is not to be found in the because it is a disorder. Down’s Syndrome is a syn- 1994 edition of DSM-IV because, at drome, yet its genetic cause was not the time it was being prepared (1990- discovered until many years after its 1993), there were too few articles in description. We still have no treat- “grouping of signs the scientific literature to justify a ment for it. That does not preclude submission. Their statement implies the fact that it is a syndrome. a submission and rejection; there was A syndrome is not defined by elu- never even a submission. The DSM- and symptoms, based cidation of its cause, prognosis, and V is scheduled for publication in treatment, but on the basis of the 2010. Committees are scheduled to cluster of symptoms that appear to- start meeting in 2003. gether. The vast majority of disorders on their frequent At this point, I have lists of 135 ar- listed in DSM-IV are syndromes and ticles (by over 150 authors) on the were once labeled as such prior to PAS in peer-review journals and 65 their inclusion. For example, Tour- citations from courts of law in which co-occurrence.” ette’s Syndrome, when accepted into the PAS has been recognized. Fur- DSM-III, became Tourette’s Disor- thermore, in November 2000, after a der. Inclusion in DSM-IV does not Frye Test hearing, a court of law in require knowledge of cause, progno- Florida concluded that PAS has re- sis, and treatment. Obviously, these ceived such widespread acceptance in are important considerations, but are The mother and her lawyer recog- the scientific community that it war- of concern after one has made the nize that if the court “buys in” to the rants recognition in courts of law proper diagnosis. My books and ar- father’s lawyer’s arguments, the (Kilgore v. Boyd). This ruling was ticles on the PAS deal in depth with court will not then take seriously the subsequently upheld by a Florida causes, prognosis, and treatment mother’s claim that the father is a Court of Appeals (Boyd v. Kilgore). (Gardner, 1992, 1998, 2001). PAS indoctrinator, will “believe the These lists are being continually The authors continue: “Hence, the children,” and possibly deprive her updated on my website at www. term PAS does not add any informa- of primary custody. I will come back rgardner.com. tion that would enlighten the court, to this important and crucial point. These lists of peer-reviewed ar- the clinician, or their clients.…” My The authors state that I have writ- ticles and legal citations will be in- experience has been just the opposite. ten that the indoctrinating parent is cluded when a submission on the The PAS diagnosis, being one cause usually the mother. This was cer- PAS is proposed to the DSM-V com- of parental alienation, can be very tainly the case during the 1980s and mittee. useful to the court. Of all the sources well into the 1990s. However, in the The authors state: of parental alienation, it is one that last few years I have noted a gender “ If PAS is considered a ‘grouping directs attention to the programmer. shift, so that at this point I consider of signs and symptoms, based on It makes the court’s job easier when fathers and mothers to be equal with their frequent co-occurrence,’ it this particular subtype of parental regard to the number of cases in should be considered a nondiag- alienation is identified. which parents are alienators. nostic syndrome, but this sheds no I am sure the authors would agree In the section entitled, “Criticisms light on cause, prognosis, and that it is better to use the term “myo- of the PAS,” the authors suggest that treatment of these behaviors.” cardial infarction,” rather than I am not aware of the multiplicity of PAS well satisfies the syndrome re- “heart disease” (which is the diagno- other factors that can bring about quirement that it is a “grouping of sis doctors made prior to the late 19th alienation between children and par- signs and symptoms, based on their century). The history of medicine ents. This statement has absolutely frequent co-occurrence.” This is what and science is the history of progres- nothing to do with reality. makes it diagnostic. One makes a di- sively greater refinements. Breaking Prior to my first publication on the agnosis on the basis of the frequently down a disease into its subtypes al- PAS in 1985, I wrote extensively occurring cluster of symptoms. lows for a more specific “targeted” about the various kinds of family The term “nondiagnostic syn- treatment. By using PA for PAS the problems that could result in children drome” is mutually contradictory to
8 WWW.GOCRC.COM Feature authors are causing confusion and Substantial Evidence of PAS reversing the trends of history. I do not consider over 135 articles by The authors’ claim that the debate over 150 authors and 67 legal cita- around PAS results from the fact that tions to indicate that “there is a I am using a medical syndrome to ex- relative absence of any empirical or plain family orientation and interac- research support for the reliable iden- tion issues. This is not true. In all my tification of PAS.” writings I discuss in detail the vari- The authors then claim that my ar- ous family interactions involved in ticles on the PAS have been self-pub- PAS. The vast majority of disorders lished. This absurd statement has ab- in DSM-IV involve family interac- solutely nothing to do with reality. tions, but descriptions of the family At the time I write this, my website The authors claim that there is: issues are not necessary for making lists 14 published articles, four in “… a lack of empirical support for the diagnosis. press, and one submitted for publi- PAS as a diagnostic entity.” PAS is a Product of the cation. All 19 are in peer-review jour- Apparently, the 135 articles, most Adversary Legal System nals. Not one of my articles on the of which are based on empirical ex- PAS has ever been self-published. The primary reason for the debate is periences, do not provide enough Next, the authors would lead the that PAS is a product of the adver- support for the authors. The authors reader to believe that I do not con- sary legal system, and the families in then describe: cern myself with historic reasons for which the PAS is present believe “The barring of testimony about the children’s resistance to visit with (very naively) that the courts provide PAS in some courtrooms.” the alienated parent. My 1998 book their best hope for resolving their True, some courts have barred (which the authors cite) describes in disputes. In the adversary system, it PAS, which is not surprising for a great detail the historic reasons: the behooves the programming parent to newly-described disorder being adju- family factors, the environmental fac- deny the existence of the PAS, and it dicated in a court of law. But the au- tors, and the individual psychody- behooves the victim parent to try to thors make absolutely no mention of namic factors. convince the court that PAS is very the 65 courts of law that have recog- Their statement that I have circum- much a real entity. The primary nized PAS and that it has passed a scribed PAS, totally oblivious to the source of the debate is that lawyers Frye Test hearing. The authors then family factors, has nothing to do with are continually looking for reasons claim that PAS involves: anything that I have ever written. to deny the existence of PAS and for “The overly simplistic focus on the Their citations to Rand, Walsh and mental health professionals who will brainwashing parent as the pri- Bone on that point would suggest to support the denial of PAS program- mary etiological agent.” the reader that these authors support mers in courts of law. If deniers and Kelly and Johnston with regard to No Brainwashing Parent, distracters of PAS were to say to law- this criticism. The Rand, Walsh and No PAS yers: “You know, I’ve been giving a Bone articles do just the opposite. It is true that I do focus on the brain- lot of thought to the PAS, and I think They, as do I, recognize the complex- washing parent, but it is not true that Gardner is right. It does exist, and it’s ity of family factors that are opera- this is “overly simplistic.” The fact is important to say so in courts of law tive in bringing about PAS. We see that when there is PAS, the primary in order to help defend victim par- here yet another misrepresentation etiological factor is the brainwashing ents,” they would lose business. by the authors. parent. And, when there is no brain- Another reason for the debate is The authors are correct when they washing parent, there is no PAS. that in the period when mothers were claim that in the severe cases of PAS, This does not mean that all alien- more likely than fathers to be PAS I recommend placement of the child ated children have brainwashing par- indoctrinators, those who recognized with the hated parent and court sanc- ents. What this means is that there is PAS risked being labeled as biased tions. The authors would lead the a subcategory of alienated children against women and “sexist.” And the reader to believe that this is the case who do have brainwashing parents. equation “PAS equals bias against with the vast majority of PAS cases When there is a primary cause, it is women” has carried over now into that I see. useful to label it as such. the era when men are equally likely I have repeatedly stated in my writ- With regard to the frequent mis- to be PAS indoctrinators. ings that these are “last resort” rec- application of the PAS diagnosis, that Unfortunately, the dictum is ommendations and apply to only is true. There are abusing fathers who deeply embedded in the psyche of about 10 percent of all cases that I claim that the children’s alienation many in the legal and mental health have seen. These are the cases in has nothing to do with their abuses, professions. In the past, denial of PAS which the indoctrinating parent but is the product of the children’s became a weapon for women who (whether mother or father) is relent- being programmed into PAS by their were PAS indoctrinators. Now that less in the indoctrinations and some- mothers. And there are mental health men are equally likely to be PAS in- times paranoid. These are the cases professionals who do not properly doctrinators, the deniers of PAS are in which it is quite clear that if the make the diagnosis, sometimes with hurting women victims of their children are not transferred, there disastrous results for the family. husband’s PAS indoctrinations. will be lifelong alienation. My follow- These misapplications are unfortu- The authors then state: up study of 99 PAS children provides nate, but it is illogical to blame them “There is a relative absence of any compelling evidence for this conclu- on the disorder or the person who empirical or research support for sion (Gardner, 2001). first introduced the term and de- the reliable identification of scribed its etiology, pathogenesis, PAS….”
Continued on page 10
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 9 Feature
NO... these symptoms are present, I look Women’s Rights groups, because they Continued from page 9 back into the family to ascertain the are still stridently taking the position cause: it’s usually a programmer. that PAS does not exist, that PAS is clinical manifestations, and treat- When one sees another constellation not a syndrome, etc. etc. ment. We do not blame Henry Ford of symptoms of alienation—e.g., It is obvious, then, that women’s for automobile accidents, nor should symptoms of physical abuse, emo- past denial and discrediting of PAS we get rid of cars because of them. tional abuse, sexual abuse, and ne- has now come back to haunt other Nor do we blame the Wright broth- glect—one usually sees other reasons women. Women are now being in- ers and get rid of airplanes because having little, if anything, to do with jured by their own weapons or, as the there are airplane accidents and ter- PAS programming. old saying goes, “They are being hoist rorists will use them as human The Whole Picture by their own petards.” Kelly and bombs. Johnston’s position, then, is contrib- The authors consider themselves to The authors go on to “reformulate” uting to the grief of women who are be looking at the whole picture, im- the PAS. They claim, somewhat con- targets of their husbands’ PAS indoc- plying that I do not. If I didn’t look descendingly, that their focus is on trinations. ■ the alienated child and that I errone- at the whole picture and focused on ously focus on the alienating parent. the child only (as the authors profess they are doing), I would not have However, without the alienating par- References ent, the child wouldn’t be alienated. identified the main cause: the pro- gramming parent. Anyone reading Parental Alienation Syndrome vs. Without stopping the alienation, the Parental Alienation: Which Diagnosis child is going to continue to be alien- any of the many books and articles I have written in the field of child psy- Should Evaluators Use in Child Cus- ated. tody Disputes?, Richard A. Gardner, By reducing the alienator’s access chiatry will easily see that my ap- proach has always been on the whole American Journal of Family Therapy, or changing custody (in severe cases), Vol. 30, No. 2, March-April 2002. I am certainly focusing on the alien- family with a particular focus on pro- tecting the child from pathological Kilgore v. Boyd, 13th Circuit Court, ated child. The implication here, also, Hillsborough County, FL., Case No. 94- is that I have not used the alienated family influences. The authors then describe what I 7573, 733 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) child as my starting point. I have. Jan 30, 2001. And when I use the child as a start- call PAS and what they call “the alienated child.” Basically, all they Boyd v. Kilgore, 773 So. 2d 546 ing point, I see a typical constellation (Fla.3d DCA 2000). of symptoms: 1) The Campaign of have done is given the PAS another name and have dropped “the big S Gardner, R.A. (1992) The Parental Denigration, 2) Weak, Frivolous, or Alienation Syndrome: A Guide for Men- Absurd Rationalizations for the Dep- word.” This muddies the waters. The history of science is the history of tal Health and Legal Professionals. recation, 3) Lack of Ambivalence, 4) Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Thera- The “Independent-Thinker” Phe- developing ever more discrete differ- entiations. The authors are going peutics, Inc.. nomenon, 5) Reflexive Support of the Gardner, R.A. (1998) The Parental Alienating Parent in the Parental backwards. Their alleged contribu- tion, their “reformulation,” is basi- Alienation Syndrome, Second Edition. Conflict, 6) Absence of Guilt Over Cresskill, New Jersey: Creative Thera- Cruelty to and/or Exploitation of the cally scientific regression. What they are doing is just the opposite of sci- peutics, Inc.. Alienated Parent, 7) Presence of Bor- Gardner, R.A. (2001), Should Courts rowed Scenarios, and 8) Spread of the entific progression. As mentioned, the authors do not Order PAS Children to Visit/Reside with Animosity to the Extended Family the Alienated Parent? A Follow-up and Friends of the Alienated Parent. seem to appreciate that their discred- iting and/or denying the PAS is a ter- Study. American Journal of Forensic Psy- Most of these symptoms are seen chology, 19(3):61-106. in the moderate cases, and all are usu- rible disservice to women. I have seen ally seen in the severe cases. When many women who are victims of their husbands’ PAS indoctrinations, women who know well that PAS ex- ists, women who have sought my help Get a 3.9% in supporting them against their PAS- CRC Needs CRC Credit Card indoctrinating husbands in courts of • Free or reduced rent office space. law. They know quite well that de- Get a tax write-off as you help kids Get the CRC VISA Credit Card, and ob- nying PAS’s existence weakens their and CRC. 2,000 square feet or more tain a low 3.9 percent introductory cases. anywhere in the Washington, D.C. rate. The credit card displays the CRC Such target mothers often find area (Maryland, D.C. or Virginia) logo, and CRC receives a small contri- themselves helpless. They cannot get • Volunteers to help with filing, bution every time you use the card. help from therapists who are still phone calls, and writing letters. CRC receives more if you break up a mouthing the old mantras: “PAS is • Our chapters need computers and large purchase into several small pur- just Gardner’s theory,” “PAS doesn’t office space. chases. For an application, contact exist because it’s not in DSM-IV,” and • Lawyers to write CRC Amicus Briefs CRC, or call MBNA at 800/523-7666. “PAS is not a syndrome.” Lawyers, on appeal. If you have trouble obtaining ap- too, will tell them: “PAS exists, but • Funding. proval, contact CRC; we can’t guaran- this judge will not recognize it. I can’t tee approval, but we will gladly try. use the word ‘syndrome’ in his (her) courtroom.” And these victimized mothers cannot even turn to the
10 WWW.GOCRC.COM AROUND THE COUNTRY AND THE WORLD
Pope Urges Avoiding Divorce Suits
Associated Press, January 28, natural order and applies to ev- He acknowledged it would 2002 – Pope John Paul II urged eryone, he said. be hard for judges to refuse to lawyers and judges not to take The Roman Catholic church hear divorce cases because part in divorce cases, decrying does not recognize divorce, there is no “conscientious ob- divorce as a ”festering wound” only annulments. jector status.” But taking part in that has devastated society. John Paul said that divorce such cases amounted to col- The pontiff said his remarks has had “devastating conse- laborating with an evil, he said, applied to all divorce cases, not quences that spread in the so- urging judges and lawyers to just those involving Roman cial body like a festering instead devote their efforts to Catholics. The permanence of wound” and infected a new reconciling couples. ■ marriage is part of the divine, generation.
The Children’s Rights The Children’s Rights Council Agrees with Pope— Council made the press Lawyers Should Stay out of Divorce release (right) its “Hot Washington, D.C. – Pope John Paul II urged lawyers and judges not to take part in divorce cases, decrying divorce as a “festering wound” that has devastated society. News Item” on The Pontiff urged lawyers to instead devote their efforts to reconciling couples. The Children’s Rights Council would like to meet the Pontiff halfway. “We know www.gocrc.com and we can’t and shouldn’t abolish divorce in America, but we have long urged that lawyers stay out of the divorce process,” said David L. Levy, a lawyer and presi- distributed the release dent of the Children’s Rights Council. “Instead, mediators, parent educators and advocates for co-parenting should take over,” said Levy. to the media. “This will lead to some parents reconciling, and foster cooperation between par- ents,” Levy said. “For those parents who do not reconcile, it will make divorce a lot easier on the children. And those children will grow up to respect marriage more, because their parents divorced in a responsible, caring way—without divorce battle-oriented law- yers,” said Levy. For more information on the Children’s Rights Council, a national child- advocacy organization, see www.gocrc.com
Frustrated parents in the Estranged Parents Snatch Own Kids in United States are consider- ‘Abduction Friendly’ Japan ing a class-action lawsuit After Sam Lui filed for divorce in 1998, the court in Orange County, California, gave against the Japanese Lui custody of his 2-year-old son, and allowed his wife regular visits. The court also ruled that Lui’s wife, who is Japanese, could not take the boy outside the country and government to gain had to surrender her passport. But somehow she obtained another passport, and on one of her visits, she took her son to Japan, where they have been ever since, out of access to their children. reach of the boy’s father. For the past two years, at a cost approaching $100,000 (13 million yen), Lui has Paul Baylis fought battle after battle in the Japanese courts to get his son returned, or at least to get regular visits. At each level, all the way to the Supreme Court, the courts have sup- Asahi Shimbun/ ported the California court’s judgment. But after every victory, Lui’s ex-wife has appealed, keeping the case tied up in legal International Herald wrangling, and meanwhile, keeping the boy away from his father. In the process, she has strengthened her argument that the boy is most familiar-and therefore belongs Tribune, Jan. 28, 2002 with his mother. The case may be in the courts for another two years or more, and even after every possible legal measure has been exhausted, there is no guarantee Lui will be able to see his son, since, as critics and experts agree, it is nearly impossible to enforce a court decision in a case like this if the loser is unwilling to cooperate. “It’s outrageous,” said Thomas Flippen, Lui’s Osaka-based U.S. lawyer. “This is the case that goes on forever.”
Continued on page 12
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 11 Around the Country and The World
Japan Access to Children Continued from page 11 Evaluations of Access Flippen and others say that because Japanese courts have little power to en- Programs are Positive force their judgments, and because CRC and its chapters operate 17 “Safe Japan does not respect international Haven” Child Access Sites in six states treaties on children’s rights to have ac- (MD, VA, CT, NC, OH, IL) and Wash- cess to their parents, Japan is a virtual ington, D.C. haven for parental abduction. The sites are primarily so that argu- Japan a Haven for Parental ing parents can transfer their children Abduction between them for a Friday to Sunday weekend, at neutral locations, adminis- That means, when a marriage falls apart tered by CRC and its chapters, generally and one parent is determined to keep at church day care centers. CRC does not the children away from the other, there charge parents any fee, because CRC is little the other parent an do about it. believes that parents should not have to While this a common—even ac- pay to see their own children. After sev- cepted—situation among many Japa- eral months, most parents learn to trans- nese, more and more are starting to ques- fer their children between them at their tion the wisdom and justice of it. And own homes. with an increasing number of Japanese Preliminary evaluations from parents in international marriages, foreigners who have used CRC sites for at least are raising an even bigger stink, both in three months show the following: Walter Benda and his daughters, Japan and abroad. The situation has • 83 percent agree that the program when he last saw them six years gone so far that foreign courts and gov- ago. Their mother is holding them helps them be a better parent. ernments have become involved, urging secretly in Japan. • 100 percent say the program im- Japan to fall in line with international proves cooperation with paying fi- standards of children’s rights. nancial child support, has been In May 2000, U.S. State Department good for their children, and that the official Mary Ryan visited Tokyo to urge CRC monitors are/were helpful. action against the rising number of pa- • 100 percent also say they would rec- rental abductions involving Japanese re- ommend the program to others. ported to the State Department. • 80 percent say they don’t feel as an- “Currently, there is no enforcing gry now that they are involved in mechanism that will help solve paren- the program. tal abduction cases,” she said. • 67 percent say the program de- According to State Department creases the likelihood of them re- spokesman Chris Lamora, during the turning to court. past five or six years, the State Depart- • 91 percent say the program helps ment has dealt with custody-related their children maintain a relation- cases involving Japan. The “overwhelm- ship with both parents. ing majorities” involve a Japanese • 57 percent say the program helps mother who has taken her child or chil- resolve family problems. Intellectual dren to Japan. But some cases do involve If you would like information on how fathers who are withholding the chil- Property to open a transfer or supervised access dren from their mothers. site, contact CRC. ■ Protection Of 15 currently active cases, he said, Charlie Ruggiero, who ob- all involve an American father and a tained trademark protec- Japanese mother. Eleven involve abduc- Apply for Access Grants tion for the name and tions and four involved access issues, he The Violence Against Women Office, logo “Children’s Rights said. U.S. Department of Justice, anticipates Council” and the name (CRC Note: Sam Lui is a CRC mem- making $15 million in grants for super- and logo for our newslet- ber. Other countries that are known to vised visitation and drop-off and pick up ter “Speak Out for Chil- ignore parental kidnappings of children of children. dren” is a specialist in include Germany, Sweden, and the Arab The purpose of this grant program trademark, patent, copy- states.) from the Violence Against Women Act right, and licensing law. CRC thanks Walter Benda, co- is to provide supervised access and safe He is a partner in the law director of CRC of Japan, for sending us exchange of children between parents in firm of Ohlandt, Greeley, this article. Walter’s two daughters Ema, situations involving domestic violence, Ruggiero and Perle, 1 11, and Mari, 13, are being held in Ja- child abuse, sexual assault and stalking. Landmark Square, Suite pan by their mother. Walter has seen the Eligible grant applicants include 903, Stamford, CT 06901, girls one time in more than six years. states, local units of government, and telephone (203) 327- Walter’s parents haven’t seen them in tribal governments. Non-profit groups ■ 6067. seven years. would be required to collaborate with non-profit domestic violence and/or
Continued on page 13
12 WWW.GOCRC.COM Around the Country and The World
Hold National Child Access the Date Network Conference Sponsored by the Children’s Rights Council October 4–5, 2002 (noon Friday to Saturday evening) Discussion and Training for establishing, maintaining and funding for Access (Visitation) Centers around the country. Discussion of cooperation with the Supervised Visitation Network (SVN) Also, CRC Shared Parenting Program Hear and meet a “Sampling” of topics and speakers found at CRC’s 13 previous national conferences. October 4 to 5 weekend at the Ramada Inn, near Baltimore Washington Airport. More information later.
Access to Children Buy a Continued from page 12 Child sexual assault organizations and the courts, even though the courts are not courts. “government agencies” that could apply Access If you plan to open a site, it is expected for the funding. that you could receive up to $75,000. If If you are interested, you should re- “Tool Kit” you operate a site, you may be able to view the grant announcement on-line at from CRC ask for up to $200,000 for two years of www.ojp.usdjoc.gov/vawo. operation. For more information, contact on How To Local governments can be a state, Michelle Dodge at the Department of Establish county or town. Your non-profit orga- Justice, 202/353-7345. ■ nization would need to work with the and Main- tain a Transfer Site. Kayak Jack Takes to the Water Only $10. Last year, it was a 14-year-old boy named nea, high blood pressure and sugar dia- Clayton Giles who bicycled 3,600 miles betes. from his hometown of Calgary, Alberta, Along the way, Clark visits people and Canada, to Washington, D.C., via doz- newspapers and asks them to write let- ens of towns and cities along the way. ter to members of Congress supporting This year, it is “Kayak Jack,” a 50- his cause or articles about his water-cru- year-old Newport, KY, resident who is sade. going down the Ohio River to the Mis- “I can’t meet anyone who doesn’t sissippi River to the Gulf of Mexico and have some horror story,” he said. then north in the Atlantic Ocean to In the tiny-one-person boat, Clark car- Washington. A disabled veteran, Clark ries one day’s supply of food, a cellular began his marathon rowing expedition telephone, documents supporting his as a positive outlet for his anger and as cause, a tent, a heater and an electric “Kayak Jack” a way to protest how he believes courts blanket. Some of his stuff has been sto- handle child custody cases. len. Clark lost his daughter in a child cus- Anyone who would like to help with tody dispute with his ex-wife two years a contribution, establish a website, or ago and since then has been in court learn more about Kayak Jack should con- over child access issues. tact Ann Swango, CRC of Kentucky, at “We need a more balanced approach [email protected] or Harry Please photocopy to custody and divorce,” Clark said. Prillaman, CRC of Georgia, at ppilla@ “Family Facts” (page “The CRC motto is ‘The Best Parent is us.ibm.com 14) for distribution to Both Parents.’” A portion of the above article is from policymakers and To complete his voyage, Clark will Ronald Hawkins’ UPI article. You may judges. have to overcome more obstacles than request the article from rhawkins@ geography. He has only one leg, sleep ap- madisconcourier.com. ■
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 13 Family Facts
Divorce Rate Drops—Is the Family Structure e revolution in the U.S. enhorn Revolution Over? eporter, No. 10, October, 2001 om the 2000 Census, David Blank ance, the familygely structur on data fr oportions elentless adveports, based lary analysts had verassumed greater to pr be unstop- from American Valuesee decades R of r e than thr ecent independentagmentation r that manorce, resultingacks in e in about 1995. After morver. A series of r y married may be o end of familywed childbearingfr and div e headed b cent all suggest that the easestr in unent homes—suddenly stopped in its tr opor- early incr en under age 18cent that in ar 1996 and 72.4, the perpr pable—yen living in one-par cent. Similarly of childr w in the mid-1990s,cent Here are the data. e for 2000 is 73 per om 68 per oportion of all U.S. wfamilies in the midwith 1990s—about childr eached 72.9 peran all-time loeased fr The pr ent homes incr eached an all-time lo o-parent homes ro-par oportion couples r en in tw ven in- en living in tw in 1997—but since then has oportionstabilized. of The childr figur endell Primus finds that the pr tion of all U.S. childr ee and W o y Allan Dupr wnward descent during the late 1990s, and eoportion en, a study b oportion living with their twent but since thencent has in 2000.stabilized. In fact, theents pr stopped its docent. en, the pr , non-Hispanic childr o married par en lived with in 1999 to 69.1 per om 77.3 to 78.2 per oportion living in single-pared in a Looking onlyen at livingwhite with tw om 1997 to 1999, while duringcent the of same all U.S. period childr thecent pr liv om 1999 to 2000, rising fr cent fr centage points and the pr of these childr y 1.2 per y 0.1 per ent and about eight per creased slightly fr om the Urbaneased Institute b findseased that, b among all U.S. childr e pronounced, ents incr ed with one par Another study fr e par cent liv as even mor ent homes w . From 1995 to 2000,cent, biological or adoptiv centage points. (The study finds that in 1999 about 64 peramatic statisticom 34.8 to 38.9 perward y two per e parents, while about 25 per ose fr living in stepfamilieseased b (or blended families) decr oportion living in single-par homes decr e is perhaps the most dr o biological or adoptiv.) ent, married-coupleven homesreversal r of the long-term shift to their tw en, the decline1 percent in the in pr1999. Hero-par , they will change the step or blended family en living in tw y continue w-incomecent childr in 1997 to 4 Among loom 44 per epresenting the clear cessation and e.e And if the e will soon be dropping fr e years, r ation? y are certainly suggestiv agmentation, what ifeintegr w the proportion of easeAfrican in just American fiv childr . Moreover, theend potential of fr implicationsent trend for of our r national debate e. But the able FM-1 a significant incragmentation. ge or definitiv everse the tr Black family fr e not lar en and families for thee need better to r esent,” Internet T These changes ar ying endlessly that w lives of millions of U.S. childr en Under 18: 1950 to Pr are enormous. Instead of sa y, for the first time in decades,y Presence that our nationalof Own priorityChildr is to sustain the curr able to sa amilies, b 1); and Sources: eau, “F U.S. Censuselease Bur date: June 29,en 200 Underable 18 Co-parenting—One Reason (Internet R angements esent,”of Childr Internet T 1). “Living Arr Divorce Rate has D Why the elease date: June 29, 200 Years Old: 1960 to Pr endell Primus, De- Here’s one w ropped ay to cut do CH-1 (Internetee R and W ed with Single quire div wn on the div Allen Dupr en Liv ashington, orced par orce rate: Whene e of Childr tody to just one parents to shar ver pr e custody of a child, r actical, re- clining Shar olicy Priori- and John Guidubaldient, of sa Kys Richar ather than giving cus- Mothers in the Late 1990s (W d Kuhn of the Childr Divorce rates ar ent State Univ en’s Rights Council D.C.: Center on Budget1). and P e plummeting in statesersity wher. en’s tody of childr ties, June 15, 200 ere, Kristenw, ChildrAnderson en to both par e courts typically a Sharon Vandiv om custody have significantly morents, while states with policies that faward cus- dren, accor e div Moore, and Marthaonments: Zaslo Findings fr ding to K orces involving couples who havor sole The r uhn and Guidubaldi. Family Envir ey of America’s esearchers found that states with higher le ve chil- awards in 1989 and 1990 “ha the Nationalashington, Surv D.C.: Urban In- vorce in the follo ve shown significantly grvels of joint custody Families (W eporter is wing y , 2001). alues R Their conclusions ar ears through 1995, compar eater declines in di- stitute e based on 19 states for which appred with other states.” The American V available, including Michigan and P y the Institutew York, for Nebraska. ennsylv opriate data w published b alues, Ne ania, as well as Montana andere American V Over-all, divorce rates declines nearly four times faster in high-joint cus- ■ tody states, compar NY. ed with states wher big reason is that joint custody “r e joint custody is r hurt the other b emoves the capacity forelativ oneely spouse rare. One to y denying participation in r From The Washington P aising the childr ost, Sunday, January 25, 1998. en.” ■
Reprinted with permission from Volume 17, Number 2, Summer 2002 “Speak Out for Children,” newsmagazine of the Children’s Rights Council, 300 “I” Street, N.E., Suite 401, Washington, D.C. 20002-4389, phone 202/547-6227. ❙❙ court cases
Parents Can Agree child support agreements must be evalu- Contact Other ated by courts to determine if they are CRC Members to End Support for in the best interests of the children at the time any changes are proposed. In by E-mail 18-Year-Old addition, the minority said, the agree- Send and receive e-mail ment between the parents did not from other CRC members The Court of Appeals of Virginia ruled specify the extent of the reduction as around the country and that a father could validly end child sup- each child became emancipated. the world. If you are a CRC port payments for a child who had be- Shoup v. Shoup, No. 0098-00-4, 12/ member, email the fol- come an adult, based on an earlier agree- 27/01 ■ lowing message to Harry ment by the parents that he could do so. Prillaman, CRC Coordina- The lower court wanted the father to tor for Georgia, who is su- have to return to court to be able to end Connecticut pervising the member- support of the emancipated child. The ship list. His email address appeals court said that the agreement Cuts Back on is [email protected] was controlling, and the father did not “Dear Harry. I am a have to seek court approval to end sup- Grandparents’ national CRC member port when the child reached 18. who would like to join “Divorcing parents may and, indeed, Access the crc-general@yahoo are encouraged under Virginia public A nonparent who wants visitation with groups.com distribution policy, to reach agreement respecting the a child must present clear and convinc- list.” care and support of their minor chil- ing evidence showing a parent-like re- Call the CRC national dren,” the appeals court said. lationship with the child, as well as in- office at 202/547-6227, In the case before the court, the par- dications that the child would suffer fax 202/546-4272 or send ties were divorced in 1994, and there actual significant harm without visita- an email CRC to crcdc@ were three minor children. The final tion, the Connecticut Supreme Court erols.com to make sure divorce decree incorporated an agree- ruled Jan. 29. your national member- ment between the parties that, among In two separate cases before the court, ship is current. other things, provided for a reduction visitation had been awarded over the in support upon the emancipation of objections of the children’s parents. In each of the minor children. one of the cases (Roth), a father had When the oldest child became eman- unsuccessfully opposed visitation by his cipated, the father unilater- deceased wife’s mother and sister. In the ally reduced the amount of other case (Crockett), a grandmother Meghann Ellis, CRC support he was paying the was granted visitation with her deceased intern, on visit to mother by one third, to daughter’s nonmarital child, over the Capitol Hill to talk $1,452 per month. He did the objection of the child’s custodial father. about legislation. same thing two years later in In both cases, the lower court judges, 1997, when the second child relying on a third party visitation stat- was emancipated. The ute, ruled that visitation would be in the mother did not object at the children’s best interests. However, Su- time, but in April 1999 preme Court Justice Joette Katz said a sought, through court action, 1996 decision, Castagno v. Wholean, to enforce the original child which favored nonparent visitation support amount of $2,177 per rights, had failed to protect adequately month and collection of the fundamental right to rear one’s child arrearages. and the right to familial privacy. In the The trial court found the current cases before the Supreme Court, father in contempt of court, the petitioners had failed to claim the on the basis that the parties requisite parent-like relationship and without court approval may harm to the children, Katz said. Since not retroactively modify a such evidence was not alleged and pre- support order. The father was ordered sented, the courts below did not have to pay the mother $33,838, plus inter- jurisdiction to grant visitation, Katz con- est and the mother’s attorney’s fees. In cluded. overturning the trial court’s ruling, the [Roth v. Weston, Conn., No. 16565, appeals court said that “a rule requiring 1/29/02, and Crockett v. Pastore, Conn., parents to return to court for approval No. 16481, 1/29/02]. would undermine the Commonwealth’s Note: Jean Castagno, the grandmother policy in favor of prompt resolution of involved in the Castagno case, has, sadly, disputes concerning the maintenance been unable to see her grandchildren. and care of children upon divorce.” She is founder of G.R.A.C.E., Grandpar- However, a minority on the appeals ents and Children Embrace. She can be court said that even “self-executing” reached at [email protected]. ■
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 15 Court Cases
Move-Away can Child Support Non-Dad does Not Justify Change from High-Income Have to Pay of Custody Custodial Father Support A father’s petition to modify a di- A trial court erred in refusing a di- When a paternity declaration is va- vorce court’s grant of joint custody vorced father’s request to terminate cated following genetic testing, the in view of the mother’s remarriage his support payments to the mother man cannot be held liable for child and relocation was properly granted, of his children after he became their support arrearages, the Maryland the Georgia Court of Appeals decided primary custodian, the Pennsylvania Court of Appeal held Jan. 9 in a 4-3 Nov. 20, 2001. The Court of Appeals Superior Court decided Dec. 21, ruling. The plaintiff had consented also upheld the ensuing decree 2001. to a judgment of paternity in 1993 awarding the father primary physi- Although the mother had custody after the child’s mother told him she cal custody. of the children 27 percent of the time, had not had sexual intercourse with The court rejected the mother’s ar- and her income was substantially any other man. In 2000, when the gument that, despite the custody de- lower than the father’s, the father had plaintiff had difficulty meeting the cree, she was in fact the custodial par- not sought child support from the child support obligation, he sought a ent. Although the mother had the mother, and the money not paid to modification. DNA testing estab- children roughly 60 percent of the the father could be used for the chil- lished that he was not the child’s fa- time, her share of custody was not so dren during the time they were with ther, but the judge told him he was substantial as to entitle her to defer- the mother, the court said. accountable for arrearages to that ence, according to the court. The fact The lower court had been con- point. Without paternity, there is no that the father paid the mother $600 cerned about the disparity in the par- legal obligation, the majority on the per month in child support did not ents’ incomes, and the mother’s con- Court of Appeals said. enhance the mother’s argument that tinued fixed expenses, in reaching its However, a minority argued that, she was the primary custodian, the decision that the father should con- because the man owed the money, he court said. tinue to pay the mother, despite the was subject to whatever legal vehicles The mother planned to move 72 fact that the children were with him existed to enforce the debt. miles away, thus making impractical 73 percent of the time. [Walter v. Gunter, Md., No. 41, the custody arrangement under which [Colonna v. Colonna, Pa. Super. Sept. Term 2002, 1/9/02] ■ both parents lived in the same school Ct., No 1765 WDA 1999, 12/21/ district, and the children shifted mid- 01] ■ The above cases are summarized from week between the parents. Family Law Reporter, published by The Bu- [Lewis v. Lewis, Ga. Ct. App., No. reau of National Affairs, Inc. They appear P-072, 11/20/01] ■ here by permission of the publisher. Citation for LETTERS TO EDITOR International Case In our last Issue, Winter, 2002, Vol. CRC: send gifts to Nina, and she writes and 16, No. 3, page 8, we referred to a Your change from a newsletter to calls to tell me she loves me and case in which the U.S. Supreme Court a newsmagazine is terrific. The lay- thanks me, and appreciates the gifts, refused to order the return to Hong out is different and very appealing. I am not allowed to visit her. The Kong of a child who lived in Hong We hand out copies at meetings of po- pagan “Godless” state Supreme Court Kong, but was taken to the U.S. by a tential members, and the news- does nothing to help us. parent. magazine, including its large front Daniel Leverin The court said the Hong Kong fa- cover photo, makes a good impres- Montpelier, VT ther only had “rights of access” not sion. It speaks well of the organiza- ”rights of custody” that would entitle tion as a whole. CRC: the return of the child to Hong Kong Harry Prillaman Thank you for writing to us on under the international treaty known Coordinator, CRC of Georgia behalf of Mr. Lee Dudinsky and the as the Hague Convention against Par- request for his children’s school pic- ent Kidnapping. CRC: tures. We understand how anxious The citation is Tuan Anh Nguyen I thank you for all of your help and parents are to receive the pictures. v. Immigration and Naturalization advice. It was worth a million dollars. Our photographer does a wonderful Service, 533 U.S._ 2001 U.S. Lexis The major problem in this country job. 4340, (2001). Thanks to Paul Robin- is the family problems created by di- The pictures of Mr. Dudinsky’s son of CRC and Joan Entmacher of vorce. CRC is actively involved in the children were mailed to him, so they the National Women’s Law Center, courts and making a difference. I am should be in his possession by now. for this information. ■ going to go back into the Washing- Sincerely yours, ton County “Kangaroo” Family Court Ann M. Smith in Barre, VT, to get to help my daugh- Headmaster Emeritus, Second ter Nina, and to see her. Baptist Church Even though I write letters and Houston, Texas
16 WWW.GOCRC.COM U.S. AND ABROAD
Separated and divorced mothers who funding for the troubled Children and refuse to allow contact between chil- Family Court Advisory and Support dren and former partners risk being Service (CAFCASS)—the agency that fined, ordered to attend parenting handles court disputes involving chil- classes or even forced to seek psychi- dren. atric help, under the proposals being But “throwing money at CAFCASS considered by the Lord Chancellor’s will not solve all its problems,” the Department. Courts would also order report adds; the service also needs an mothers to do community service or expanded function. This would result to pay compensation to the fathers in fewer contested court proceedings for denying them contact with their and substantial savings in time and children. money spent in court, as well as the A long-awaited report, Making “more intangible emotional benefits Contact Work, published in February to children and 2002, suggests a range of tougher families.” powers proposed for courts to help Mr. Coe wel- to deal with estranged parents locked comed the report With 143,000 in bitter and prolonged conflict over as extremely contact with children. With 143,000 positive, noting children aged under 16 experiencing particularly the children aged family breakdown every year, the provision for proposals could have far-reaching parenting classes under 16 implications for hundreds of thou- and court pow- sands of youngsters. ers to order com- Ten years after the Children Act pensation which experiencing of 1989 came into force, child con- could be used for Tony and Christine Coe tact disputes still bedevil relations be- “holidays lost,” family tween separated parents. It is esti- he said. mated that up to 40 percent of It was a wel- breakdown every non-resident parents lose contact come shift “from British Parents with their children within two years just punitive of separation or divorce. measures to an year, the who Block Access Many give up when mothers refuse emphasis on fa- to cooperate with orders granting ac- cilitating access. proposals could Face Fines cess. The most determined will re- This report has turn to court 20 or 30 times to try to taken on board Hundreds of thousands of children get court orders enforced, usually everything we have far-reaching with little success. have said about could see their fathers regularly Groups such as Families Need Fa- the need for both implications for thers and the Equal Parenting Coun- parents to be re- under proposals to act against cil have been demanding equal rights spected and kept hundreds of for both parents and become increas- a part of their divorced mothers who continually ingly critical of the stance of judges children’s lives. in the family courts. But it is crucial thousands of flout court orders allowing access. Tony Coe, founder of the Equal that it now be Parenting Council, said that the ef- acted on ur- youngsters. Frances Gibb, Legal Editor and fects could be devastating. “Parents gently; every day are hardwired to nurture and care for that passes does Alexandra Frean their children and to be totally cut- damage in these off from them is the most unnatural cases.” The Times (London), February 9, 2002 and extraordinary thing in the The proposals will alarm women’s world,” he said. groups, which maintain that one of “The biggest tragedy is for the chil- most common reasons that mothers dren who have to hang on to the re- refuse to comply with contact orders maining parent for fear they might is the fear of abuse. end up losing both parents. It affects In its submission to the report’s au- their ability to form relationships in thors, the Women’s Aid Federation, later life.” which campaigns against domestic Mr. Coe said that growing numbers violence, said that it was inappropri- of mothers were finding themselves ate to start enforcing contact orders in this situation, although fathers had without introducing preventive mea- generally suffered most. sures to ensure that contact arrange- The report says that there is a com- ments could be safe. pelling case for more government Continued on page 18
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 17 U.S. and Abroad
British Parents Continued from page 17
Rosie Winterton, junior minister the public’s. “Policy disrespects that across the nation. at the Lord Chancellor’s Department, at its peril.” “The Government must put an im- welcomed the report. Ministers Says Tony Coe, of the Equal mediate end to the courts’ discrimi- would respond as soon as possible, Parenting Coalition, a CRC affiliate nating against one parent. We de- she said. in Great Britain; mand Equal Parenting—meaning The Government is wasting its time “Sir Nicholas Wall’s report to the equal treatment of both parents by and money by “finger wagging and Lord Chancellor confirms what we the legal system for the benefit of the nagging” about the importance of have been saying for years—the fam- children concerned. marriage, the nation’s leading paren- ily justice system is gravely defective. “The bottom line is: why should ting charity said. Well-intentioned “Make no mistake as to the impli- one fit parent be empowered by the policies intended to promote mar- cations: this means that millions of legal system to prevent the other fit riage backfired because people re- children and parents have been parent from being a parent to their sented being told how to live their wrongly separated from each other children? lives, the National Family and Paren- since the passing of the Children’s “Affected parents and their chil- ting Institute said at the start of Na- Act by family court judges who failed dren are now looking into mounting tional Marriage Week. to implement Parliament’s express a class action against the UK Govern- Mary MacLeod, the Institute’s intention that shared parenting ment for massive compensation as a chief executive, said that policy- should be the norm after separation. consequence of the damage and mis- makers had become so used to see- “The judiciary have ignored Parlia- ery needlessly inflicted by the denial ing marriage from a utilitarian stand- ment’s intention which is why of theirs and their children’s Human point that they had forgotten that the mums, dads and grandparents have Rights to family life.” most important ingredient was love. been protesting outside judges’ For further information, you can People marry for their own good, not houses out of sheer desperation all contact Tony Coe via email at [email protected] ■ ADVERTISEMENT
“NEW PERSPECTIVES,” a chapter of the Children’s Rights Council, Washington, D.C. announces A Workshop for Children of Divorce and Their Families on The Art of Creating Peace Within Oneself, With Family, Stepfamily, and Extended Family Children’s book author, illustrator, educator, Bette S. Margolis and Dr. John Tollan, psychotherapist, are offering an effective and pleasurable workshop for children of divorce and their families.
WHAT WILL YOU LEARN AT THE At its core the workshop is WORKSHOP? spiritual but non-sectarian in Participants will learn how to respond nature, exploring and culti- positively and productively to conflicts vating higher consciousness, and concerns experienced by your chil- love, faith, honesty, forgive- dren, and by yourself. Children of di- ness, patience, compassion, vorce, in age-appropriate groups from 6 through late grace, and much more. teens, and their families, stepfamilies, and/or ex- The foundation of the workshop and class exercises tended families will learn: are based on A Heart Full of Love, by Bette S. Margolis, • The art of self awareness a story about a child of divorce. • How to nurture a peaceful relationship with your- The book won first place in the Guilded Quill Award, self, family, stepfamily, and extended family a national writing contest, and has been endorsed by • The development of a strong personal value system numerous expert organizations and professionals in- • Acceptance of personal responsibility for your hap- cluding the American Psychiatric Press, author John piness Bradshaw, the Stepfamily Association of America, • The cultivation of meaningful family ties Parents Without Partners, National Organization of • How to discover a profound purpose in your life Single Mothers, and the Children’s Rights Council of Washington, D.C. For information about booking “New Perspectives” Phone: 303-713-9805, or write: Ms. Bette Margolis “New Perspectives” Developmental Process 8301 S. Pebble Creek Way, #48-102 • Highlands Ranch, Colorado 80126 We can travel anywhere in the country to give this workshop, which can be half-day, full day or two days, depending on need.
18 WWW.GOCRC.COM PRACTICAL ADVICE ON FAMILY MATTERS....Poetry
Poetry It Will Get Better And a little poem, not about divorce, but about life: Counts Divorce is sad It makes you mad Song of the Open Road How many times have we heard that parents should Too bad you can’t change it I think that I shall never see read to their children? It is one of the most fun It starts A billboard lovely as a tree things in life. Having your child on your lap, Never stops Indeed, unless the billboards while you read the fall words, is an irreplaceable Divorce hurts people joy. You and me I’ll never see a tree at all. There are many par- — Ogden Nash ents who are separated, It feels like you were stung divorced, or never-mar- Poems from this poet were once ried, who would almost by a million bees called “The Golden Trashery of Ogden die for the right to read Nashery.” to their children. They Someone leaves CRC welcomes your poetry submis- are parents who just sions. Please send your poems to CRC, want to see their kids, to So suddenly 300 “I” Street, NE, Suite 401, Washing- be part of their lives, but ton, D.C. 20002 or via fax to 202/546- It’s like a changing tree ■ who are blocked from 4272. doing so. After time the hurt goes Fit parents who are blocked by a court, away blocked by the other par- ent, or blocked because of You learn to smile a move-away by the par- ent with the child across And even play the country. So when you feel For those parents who are lucky enough to be Like your world is crashing able to read to their chil- dren, here are a few po- down ems. Look up and put your feet back on the ground It will get better It always does — Alex, New York, Age 13 From Broken Hearts…Healing, Young Poets Speak Out on Divorce, Edited by Dr. Tom Worthen, Ph.D., The Poet Tree Press, $20. ISBN 1-5886-150-9. Avail- able from bookstores or CRC.
from Arrow Book of Funny Poems
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 19 Practical Advice on Family Matters...
$500 CRC College Scholarship Available CRC will award a $500 scholarship in the For further information about why this scholarship pro- Frank Banner III Scholarship Fund in 2002. gram was established, see “Speak Out for Children,” Win- More than one scholarship will be awarded, ter 2002, which is available online at www.gocrc.com. if contributions permit. CRC hopes this scholarship fund will focus attention The fund was established to acknowledge on the plight of all children at risk of abuse, neglect, and Frank Banner III, who turned 14 on Sep- abandonment, all of which are increased when the child tember 9, 2001, but his dad could not does not have both a mother and a father in the child’s wish him Happy Birthday. That’s be- life. cause young Frank was one of We welcome your tax-deductible contributions to the 160,000 children kidnapped by a Frank Banner III College Scholarship Fund. parent each year. Only children or other high school students related to Was Mr. Banner an abusive or current national Children’s Rights Council members are neglectful parent? Hardly. He is eligible to apply for the scholarship(s). See application a deputy U.S. Marshal, and his information below. ■ six other children turned out just fine.
Frank Banner ank Banner III Scholarship Fund in Instructions for Student Applicants en’s Rights Council.e than C. (Letters mor e: ent member of the national Childrwing: CRC will award at least one $500 scholarship to the Fr elated to a curr 2002. The rules for applying ar e than a two- to three-page letter to CR • The child must be r ead). The letter should state the follo • The child should write no mor three pages long will not be r our high school;all of 2002; 1. Your name, address, telephone number and the date at the topent, of the you letter; or the adult can om 2. The name and locationou plan toof attendy andchild, in the other F family member) to the member of national 3. What college y 4. Your relationship (child, gr CRC. If unsure as to whetherou havenational had tomembership overcomexperience; in is your currour life, future what career you learned goals orfr life contact CRC; ou in your college e om this scholarship; 5. Explain any struggle that y xceed an additional it, and how it willourself, help youry previousays you wouldaccomplishments, benefit fr y 6. Tell us about y expectations, and in what w y other relevant documents, not to e 7. Sign the letter; anscripts and an • Attach unofficial tr om the CRC member and one other person, such as a counse- three pages. • Letter of recommendation. fr lor or teacher essed to: , Jr. Letters should be addr Mr. Frank Banner Children’s Rights Council eceived by e is only one applicant, that appli- College Scholarship Fund 300 “I” Street, N.E. ch 1, 2002. If ther Washington, D.C. 20002 ere received as of Mar y June 10. No applications w or next year. cant gets the scholarship.ecipient(s) Don’t willAfter letbe thisnotified May scholarship 15, b apply go f unclaimed. Letters must be r May 15, 2002. R
20 WWW.GOCRC.COM Practical Advice on Family Matters...
President CRC to File Class Action Law Suit Bush Issues for Shared Parenting CRC is continuing with its plans to file the brief and related materials, but also National a class action lawsuit on behalf of the to file non-CRC sponsored individual constitutional right by children to co- and class action lawsuits in the various Child’s Day parenting by their fit mothers and fa- states. We will provide attorneys with a thers. model brief that can be adapted to filing Resolution CRC hopes to file the suit in 2002, in in their states. federal district court in the District of 3) Plaintiffs. CRC needs plaintiffs— for 2001 Columbia, perhaps the most progressive fit parents who have been denied shared of all the 13 federal circuit courts in the parenting (joint custody) within recent National Child’s Day is U.S. What CRC needs are: months (not 5 years ago), as well as chil- coming up. You can cel- 1) Funds. To research, mount and dren who have sought shared parenting. ebrate it either the first or publicize this suit could take $30,000 or But we do not need plaintiffs just yet, second Sunday in June. more. Publicity is necessary to attract because of delays in preparing this law- “Either of those days enough attention to the suit so that it is suit. is nestled between more likely to receive favorable media To make better law, we must break Mother’s Day and Father’s attention. Judges, like everyone else, can new ground. Day, where it should be,” be affected by how an issue is viewed in Please support this effort. said CRC President David the community. For more information, or to make a L. Levy. 2) Lawyers. CRC needs attorneys tax-deductible contribution, contact CRC and Focus, a group who are not only willing to help prepare CRC. ■ headed by Mrs. Lee Rechter in Florida, are urging President Bush to declare National Child’s Equal Parents’ Week: September 23–29, 2002 Day a permanent, na- tional holiday. The U.S. is one of the few countries Equality and Love are More Than Concepts—They Are Values. that do not celebrate a Patti Diroff, CRC International Equal Parents’ Week Coordinator national child’s day. But that situation may be changing. The message of Equal Parents’ Week In doing all these things, the most After the U.S. Senate seeks to raise public awareness of fun- important thing you have done is to be passed a resolution de- damental family values rooted in equal- a parent. claring the first Sunday in ity and in the lifetime lesson children Equality imputes values—civil rights, June as Children’s Day for learn from love. conscience, and responsibility. Families the year 2001, President Equal Parents’ Week will be observed will be in crisis until the need for both Bush issued a supportive this year from September 23 through parents and for families to function as proclamation. The presi- September 29. Candlelight vigils will families, individual self-respect and re- dential proclamation be held on Wednesday, September 25 spect among all family members, are marked Sunday, June 3, and have been moved up to start at lived by each of us. 2001, as National Child’s 7:30 p.m. These values must be promoted and Day for 2001 alone. Our values are our choices, and our protected by our laws and by govern- Senator Bob Graham choices are our values. It is through day- ment agencies. The message each purple (D-FL) sponsored the Sen- to-day parenting that we set an example ribbon sends is a message of equality, ate Resolution. of right and wrong, what we believe and responsibility and values. Each year for the past how we should live. Equal Parents’ Week emphasizes that six years, either the House Children are not taught values by “the best interests of children” cannot or the Senate has passed schools, government, businesses...or be met unless we maximize the ability a one-time resolution. elsewhere. Children learn the meaning of both parents to raise and nurture their Earlier House resolutions of right from wrong from their parents. children. declared Children’s Day in When we make choices to sacrifice This means providing children with October. But for the past because the welfare of another out- the MAXIMUM parenting effort and three years, Senator Gra- weighs the burden it places on us and to involvement each parent is willing ham has sponsored a resolve conflict with reasonableness and and able to contribute. Senate resolution declar- patience, children learn that these are This information can be found in the ing that Children’s Day is the right things to do. Equal Parents’ Week brochures. For bro- the first Sunday in When children see us make the choice chures and additional information, June. ■ to listen and understand, and know they please contact Patti Diroff, the Interna- can turn to us and we are no less will- tional Coordinator, at pattidiroff@ ing to be there for them, we have done worldnet.att.net or 909/591-3689. The more than teach them an important les- website can be found at http://members. son in life...we have taught them the tripod.com/epweek. ■ meaning of love.
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 21 BILLS IN CONGRESS
OR SEND Welfare Reform THIS LETTER— SHORT VERSION SEND THIS LETTER— The Welfare Reform Law, also known as TANF LONG VERSION Dear Chairman Her Please incr ger: (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) was Your Address year to $40 millionease from a y $10 million a Date grants to the states in the W passed by Congress in 1996, and is due to ex- thorization bill. Please alsoear ask the the statesaccess Wally Herger, Chairman, to provide a portion of thoseelfare gr Reau- pire by the end of 2002. Human Relations non-profit groups whose mission state- Subcommittee ment is to pr ants to House Ways and Means tween childr ovide greater contact be- The law must be “re-authorized” this Committee parents. en and their non-custodial year, as Congress is expected to do, Rayburn B317 15 in order to maintain the reforms Washington, D.C. 205 started in 1996. Welfare Reform ger: banned welfare as an entitlement, Dear Chairman Her and made it a time-limited program. We ask that you please increase from $10 mil- Congress put a 5 year cap on welfare lion a year to $40 million a year the Access grants to the payments to any one recipient. states in the Welfare Reauthorization bill.en $10 of millionseparated, is not divorced enough and The $16.4 billion a year Welfare to assist the more than 35 million childr Reform Act contains the $10 million never-married parents, of which as manyodial as 35 parents. percent of whom have“to a year for access (visitation) pro- difficulty in getting to see their non-cust tement is to pro- grams. Under that provision, each We also ask you direct the states to provide some of odialthe funds parents.” state receives a minimum of various non-profit organizations whose mission sta $100,000, with the average state vide greater contact between children and their non-cust June grant (figured by population) about We realize that Congress does not normally want to direct how the $185,000 per year. states can handle block grants, but an HHS report (OCSE-IM-01-03, The $10 million is provided in the 13, 2001), indicated that many states do not knowederal what grant to of do $194,000. with the 1996 Welfare Reform Act “to estab- funds, or served too few people. For example, Georgia’s access program lish and administer programs to sup- only served 213 parents in FFY 2000 erwith parent. a f Similar figures exist for port and facilitate non-custodial par- This constitutes a whopping $901 p ents’ access to and visitation of their ents at a fraction of the cost. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and other states inear that to report.$40 million Non-profit a year, children by means of activities in- groups can serve that number of par cluding mediation (both voluntary Please increase funding from $10 million a y ederal and mandatory), counseling, educa- and provide for partial funding, tofor maximize various groups the use that of these have f years tion, development of parenting plans, of experience, but little funding visitation enforcement (including dollars. monitoring, supervision and neutral Sincerely yours, drop-off and pick-up) and develop- Sign, then print name ment of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.” The $10 million has grown to $50 • Georgia received a federal access mittee. Write separate letters. See million because five years worth of grant of $194,205 and only sample letters above. block-grants have been distributed to served 213 parents. This consti- Write the same letter to other mem- the states. Block grants mean that the tutes a whopping cost of $901 bers of the Human Resources Sub- states can organize and manage the per parent; committee: money, so long as they provide one • Connecticut received $110,000, Nancy L. Johnson, CT or more of the services provided by and served about 100 families, Wes Watkins, OK Congress. The courts, child support which comes to about $1,000 per Benjamin L. Cardin, MD agencies, and other agencies of state family. Scott McInnis, CO government administer the funds. • Massachusetts received $152,000 Fortney Pete Stark, CA Only a few states have contracted and served 265 families. which Jim McCrery, LA with non-profit organizations with is almost $600 per family. Sander M. Levin, MI experience in working on behalf of In letters submitted to the U.S. Dave Camp, MI children and non-custodial parents, Department of Health and Human Jim McDermott, WA to administer some of the programs. Services (HHS) by national CRC, and Phil English, PA But many states do not know what CRC chapters in New Jersey, Florida, Lloyd Doggett, TX to do with the funds, or serve too few Maryland, and Ohio, we pointed out Ron Lewis, KY people. A report was published by the that “organizations whose mission is Address them at U.S. Department of Health and Hu- to increase contact between children House of Representatives man Services on access programs in and non-custodial parents could pro- Washington, D.C. 20515 all the states. For free copies, contact vide access services at a much lower Mr. Phil Sharman of HHS at 202/ rate, if they were provided funds.” e.g., 401-4626. In a random review of We ask you to write the following Rep. Nancy L. Johnson, some states in fiscal year 2000, the letter to the Chairman and Members House of Representatives report states that: of the House Human Resources Com- Washington, D.C. 20515
22 WWW.GOCRC.COM Bills in Congress
New Bush Administration Fatherhood Bill The Bush Administration has introduced its own version of the Fatherhood Bill, H.R. 2893, what provides $64 million for each of five years, for a broad array of demonstrations addressed at four broad goals.
These goals include: “(1) to promote re- Note: Although these are called father- sponsible, caring, and effective parent- hood bills, CRC views them as parenting ing (2) to encourage and help fathers to bills, because we see the aim as connecting support their families and avoid welfare fathers to mothers to children. by helping them to take advantage of em- It is unclear as of March, 2002, if Con- ployment related programs and support- gress will pass any of these Fatherhood ing regular payment of child support, (3) bills. to improve fathers’ ability to manage In the meantime, however, two posi- family business affairs, and (4) to en- tive developments, straight out of the courage and support healthy marriages President’s Budget sent to Capitol Hill and married fatherhood.” in early February: Of particular interest to groups that Promoting Responsible Fatherhood. run CRC-type programs, such as trans- Over 25 million children live in homes After President Bush signed a bill on fer of children sites, mediation and without fathers. To assist non-custodial January 25 providing for mentoring hotlines for referrals, a provision in H.R. fathers to become more involved in their 2893 says the bill is “to promote respon- children’s lives, the budget provides $20 children of prisoners, CRC President sible, caring and effective parenting million in competitive grants to faith- David L. Levy had a brief conversation through counseling, mentoring and based and community organizations. with the President. parenting education, dissemination of As Congress considers this budget Levy thanked President Bush for educational materials and information proposal, contact your House member signing a strong co-parenting law in on parenting skills, encouragement of in Washington, D.C., or state officials positive father involvement, including who award grants in the child and fam- 1995, when he was Texas governor. the positive involvement of non-resident ily area. The law requires Texas judges to give fathers, and other methods.” Mentoring Children of Prisoners. The a parent at least a third of the time H.R. 2893 also provides funds for President recognizes that, as a group, the on a year-round basis with their media campaigns to promote responsible more than two million children with child. The judge may give more time, fatherhood. parents in prison have more behavioral, The problem with H.R. 2893 is that health, and educational problems than but may not give less, without the grants would only be competed for the population at large. Mentoring by stating the reason in writing. Title 5, by national organizations. State groups caring adults serving as positive role Chapter 153, Sections 312 to 317 of working on fatherhood, publicity and models can brighten the outlook for Texas Family Code. Be sure to ask for outreach programs involving parenting these children. Therefore, the budget in- shared parenting, even though you skills and father involvement could not cludes $25 million for competitive qualify. grants to faith and community-based are not supposed to have to ask, says The Bush version was introduced by groups for programs providing mentors Diana Buffington, CRC Texas Rep. Wally Herger (R-CA), the chairman to children of prisoners. Coordinator. of the powerful House Human Re- (The $25 million is based on a law sources Subcommittee, the body that signed by President Bush on January 25, will consider what bill to recommend to 2002 called “Promoting Safe and Stable the full House. Families” act, H.R. 2873. For informa- Two other fatherhood bills have been tion on how your non-profit group can introduced, S. 653, introduced by Sen. qualify for funding, contact your state Evan Bayh (D-IN) and H.R. 1300, in- officials in charge of funding to child and troduced by Rep. Julia Carson (D-IN). family organizations.) CRC prefers a state-by-state approach CRC President David L. Levy was in- to media campaigns and other programs, vited to the bill signing in the East Room which is the approach of S. 653 and H.R. of the White House. ■ 1300.
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 23 ❙❙ research
Research Continues to Show Positive Benefits of Co-Parenting (Joint Custody)
1. Cohen, Irene M. (1998). 2. Arditti Joyce A., & Madden- 3. Madden-Derdich, Debra A., Post-decree litigation: Is joint Derdich, Debra (1997). Joint Leonard, Stacie A., & Chris- custody to blame? Family & and sole custody mothers: topher, F. Scott (1999). Conciliation Courts Review, Implications for research and Boundary ambiguity and co- 36(1) pp. 41-35 practice. Families in Society, parental conflict after divorce: XX, 36-45. An empirical test of a family This paper rejects the hypothesis systems model of the divorce that joint custody leads to increased Some of the implications of the process. Journal of Marriage relitigation. The author concludes findings are as follows. First, joint and the Family, 61, 588-598. that in fact the reverse is true; joint custody in this sample may have custody actually reduces postdecree helped mothers by facilitating emo- The authors note that coparental relitigation, with the obvious excep- tional support from the fathers. Hos- conflict following divorce is a strong tion of custody modification actions. tility at the time of the divorce did predictor of children’s adjustment. The large majority of actions do not not relate significantly to custody This study was intended to test a family address custody arrangements or con- arrangement, so the findings are con- systems model that proposes “bound- cerns, but financial ones, and the ma- sistent with the idea that joint cus- ary ambiguity” as a major source of jority of cases involved relitigation tody itself can lead to better coparen- coparental conflict. “Boundary am- for increased support. Furthermore, tal relations—as opposed to the idea biguity” refers to difficulty in estab- there was a “close relationship” be- that only low-conflict couples are lishing clear relationship boundaries tween visitation disputes and support likely to accept joint custody at the that define the former partner as a modification. time of divorce. coparent but not a spouse. To sum up, this study provides no This support from the fathers may Although custody type was not evidence that joint custody is likely in turn have led to the reduced feel- analyzed as part of this study, the to lead to increased relitigation com- ings of parenting stress for the joint findings are relevant to joint custody pared to sole custody. While the custody mothers. The authors sug- research. Other studies indicate that sample of cases was drawn from one gest that the greater custody satisfac- joint custody is associated with less period of several years in a single tion expressed by sole custody moth- parenting stress and less financial state (Colorado), raising the issue of ers may be due to the psychological strain for mothers, both of which led generalizability, these findings are meanings attributed to custody to greater boundary ambiguity, and consistent with available research arrangements. Sole custody may be from there to greater coparental con- from other jurisdictions (Phear et al, more consistent with traditional so- flict, in this study. So, joint custody 1984; Pearson & Thoennes, 1990). cial expectations that the mother is could be beneficial by reducing these the primary caregiver, and the sole factors. custody mothers may have also felt For fathers, other research shows more control over their children that joint custody is associated with Advertise Here! because decisions did not have to greater custody satisfaction; in this be shared with the father. A major study, greater satisfaction was asso- 25,000 Readership limitation is the lack of the father’s ciated with reduced coparental con- perspective. flict. On balance, these findings are For parents, attorneys, consistent with the idea that joint educators, psychologists, custody could lead to reduced bound- CRC Chapters ary ambiguity for mothers, offsetting clergy... Now Forming! any increase in custody dissatisfac- “Speak Out for Children” tion, and greater custody satisfaction publishes news, advice, CRC wants chapters all for fathers. In turn, these effects could lead to reduced coparental con- research and information across the country. flict. Other studies have directly ex- from around the world Join CRC for $35 and ask amined the association between cus- for FREE 88-page tody type and parental conflict, and on Family Law, Access, found that joint custody is associated Child Custody and Divorce. Affiliation Handbook. with reduced parental conflict. ■ Call Mark Roseman at Call 1-800-787-KIDS, These three research papers are part of CRC Report R103, which provides the 203/288-7827 or join online at results of analysis of 23 joint custody for Media Kit. www.gocrc.com studies. Available from CRC for $10 for members; $13 for non-members.
24 WWW.GOCRC.COM BOOK REVIEWS
Elusive Innocence Divorce Poison by Richard A. Warshak Survival Guide for the Falsely Accused ReganBooks (HarperCollins), $26, 33 pages, ISBN 0-06- 018899-5. by Dean Tong In Warshak’s pre- Huntington House vious excellent book, Publishers, ISBN- The Divorce Revolu- 56384-190-8, $15 tion, a brief reference softback. to parents coaching Dean Tong has be- and brainwashing come the spokesman children during a for the falsely ac- custody battle cused. He has writ- touched a nerve in ten and spoken ex- parents and grand- tensively on this parents around the subject, based on world. The many re- years of research and quests for help led to evaluation of hun- this important new dreds of cases. book. The book recounts Your ex-spouse is many cases of false bad-mouthing you to abuse charges, your children, per- leading to the total haps even trying to cut-off of a father’s turn them against access to his chil- you. If you handle the dren, and spending situation ineffec- thousands of dollars tively, you could lose your children’s respect, their affec- for him to “prove” his tions—even in extreme cases, contact with them. innocence. Some advise “Do nothing” for fear that any response Take the case of the could result in greater injury to the children. But with Seattle police officer, twenty-five years of helping families, Dr. Warshak is con- Gregory Schmidt, who, vinced that a passive approach just leaves parents feel- after notifying his wife he was seeking a divorce, called ing helpless. The damage to children is considerable, par- 911 when she allegedly attacked and bit him. Yet Officer ticularly when warring parents enlist children as allies Schmidt was the one who was arrested. After an eight- in the battle. day trial, he was exonerated of a misdemeanor charge. Divorce Poison offers specific advice for parents whose Ironically, Lt. Schmidt, a fourteen-year Seattle police of- children are caught in the middle. In it, he explains ficer, said he created the department’s domestic violence how to: investigative unit in 1994. Lieutenant Schmidt and his • react if your children refuse to see you attorney said the officer was the real victim of gender • respond to rude and hateful behavior profiling and Schmidt’s wife was the actual aggressor in • minimize damage from bad-mouthing the case. • identify and correct your own contributions to With the federal Violence Against Women’s Act parental-child conflicts (VAWA), hundreds of millions of dollars, and state laws • defend against false accusations of brainwashing all geared to protect women, judges “rubberstamp” pro- • choose the best therapist and lawyer. tective orders for women. Connecticut attorney Arnold Whether they are perpetrators of divorce poison, vic- Rutkin, editor of the legal journal Family Advocate, says tims of it, or both, parents who heed Warshak’s advice due process hearings held later are “usually a sham.” will enable their children to maintain love and respect The author says, “We will not win the war against child for two parents who no longer love, and may not respect, abuse until we first win the battle against false accusa- each other. tions.” But the author weakens his case by claiming that To protect children from exposure to destructive ten- of the 1 million cases of child abuse and neglect in 1998, sion, Warshak says transfers should be arranged so that 71 percent are “unfounded and false.” Unfounded does both parents are not present at the same time. He says not mean that the case is false, only that there is not this is best accomplished by having one parent drop off enough evidence to move forward. Elsewhere, Tong states the children at school in the morning and the other par- that about 10 percent of the reports are the result of mal- ent pick them up at the end of the day. The author says ice, and are thus false. Hence he should have said that communities may also have a special facility that moni- according to the National Center for Child Abuse and tors child exchanges for a small fee. (CRC has such child Neglect, 71 percent of cases are unfounded OR false, if exchange centers, none of which charges parents a fee.) this is indeed what he meant to say. The book is loaded with information, but easy (as well Despite this, the book, which contains tips to counter as sad) to read. There are many “Take Action” tips so false accusations, is a valuable resource. As noted syndi- parents know exactly what to do. cated columnist Kathleen Parker states in a book jacket One parent I know says she wishes she had this book quote, “Dean Tong’s Elusive Innocence should be a wake- 10 years ago, when she needed it. That is testament up call to child advocates and lawmakers.” She is right. ■ enough. Read this outstanding book. ■
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 25 Book Reviews
Sacred Places, Civil Purpose It is not as simple as the country being split into hos- tile camps; Americans, as individuals, are often divided Should Government Help Faith-Based Charity? within themselves. So sets the stage for this provocative book, whose by E. J. Dionne, Jr. and Ming Hsu Chen, editors prominent authors examine all aspects of these questions The Brookings Institution Press, www.brookings.edu. in more than 20 well-written essays. $23. 356 pages. The authors include Clinton White House Domestic How can anyone oppose gov- Policy Advisor Bill Galston; John J. DiIulio Jr., President ernment help for religious con- Bush’s first director of Faith-based Initiatives, and E. J. gregations working hard to shel- Dionne, a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post, ter the homeless, battle crime in and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute. inner cities, provide child care for Liberals and conservatives, individuals working within poor parents, and bring invest- and without the faith-based communities, offer their com- ment to the neighborhoods they ments. An interesting discussion for those who are in- serve? terested in this very timely topic. ■ How can anyone who believes in the First Amendment prom- ise of religious freedom support For Better or Worse: giving any government money to religious institutions that might Divorce Reconsidered use the funds to advance a par- by E. Mavis Hetherington and John Kelly ticular faith? W.W. Norton Company, $26.95. 320 pages. These are not unfair ques- This book says only about 20 percent of children have tions. The fact that many Ameri- long lasting negative effects from divorce, not the higher cans might see both questions as number suggested by other researchers. reasonable helps explain why our Hetherington is a long-time major researcher on di- great national debate over gov- vorce. ernment aid to faith-based agen- cies arouses such passions and The first two books are available from CRC; the last two books engenders such division. are available at bookstores or amazon.com.
UDE: NEW! 88-page manual, BENEFITS INCL “CRC’s ws Magazine Guide to Custody and P • Quarterly Ne arenting.” Essential reading on cust • “Best P arent...” ody, er access, and parenting for sepa- I will receive a New Member Packet, including the latest Bumper Stick s rated, divorced, single issue of “Speak Out for Children,” a bumper sticker saying • Discoun ts on 100 book , and never- ashington married parents. “The Best Parent is Both Parents,” a discount Hertz coupon, • A voice in W s Only $25 with an a low APR credit card application, and, if requested, the and State Capital y membership ore! or contribution of mor names of 3 groups that can help me. • Much, m uch m e than $35. MEMBERSHIP DUES: ❑ New Member, $35 ❑ Renewal, $35 ...... $_____ Date: ______❑ Student, $20 ❑ Library, $20 ...... $_____ Name: ______❑ Gift, $25 (suggested) ...... $_____ ❑ Institutional Membership, $99 ...... $_____ Address: ______Ideal for government offices and community agencies. City: ______Institutional membership includes 3 subscriptions to “Speak Out for Children,” and the other benefits for State: ______ZIP: ______3 individuals. Home #: ______Work #: ______❑ Contributing Member, $60 ...... $_____ E-mail: ______❑ Supporting Member, $250 ...... $_____ ❑ Sustaining Member, $500 ...... $_____ Is any of the above information new? ❑ yes ❑ no ❑ Life Member, $750 ❑ Silver Life, $2,000 ...... $_____ ❑ Please send me the names of 3 groups that can help me. ❑ Gold Life, $5,000 ❑ Platinum Life, $10,000 ..... $_____ ❑ CRC’s Guide to Custody and Parenting, $25 ...... $_____ PAYMENT INFORMATION: ❑ Book order total from page 29 ...... $_____ ❑ Check: payable to CRC ❑ Charge: Visa, MasterCard, AmEx TOTAL ENCLOSED $ ______Card # ______Exp. ______❑ Signature ______
Yes! I want to join the CRC! I want Yes! I want $15 of my dues applied to the duties of the CRC Chapter in the state of ______. Mail to: CRC, 300 “I” Street, N.E., Suite 401 Washington, D.C. 20002-4389 May we occasionally give your name to other groups for Phone CRC at 202/547-6227, fax 202/546-427 mailings approved by CRC? ❑ Yes ❑ No or join or order books with secure server at www.gocrc.com
26 WWW.GOCRC.COM ❙❙ catalog of resources
A. B. C. D. E.
For Kids NEW! D. Divorced Dads, Shatter- F. Putting Kids First, by For Better or For Worse: ing the Myths, by Sanford L. Michael Oddenino. A must Heart Full of Love, written Divorce Reconsidered, by Braver, Ph.D., 1998. The sur- read for caring parents and by Bette S. Margolis, illus- Mavis Hetherington and prising truth about fathers, professionals, by CRC’s Gen- trated by Christie L. Kline. A John Kelly, 2002. Surprising children and divorce. eral Counsel. Includes a wonderful book for that results from the most com- HB-205 ______$24.95 Children’s Bill of Rights. special 7- to 9-year-old in prehensive study of divorce SB-215 ______$9.95 your life who is undergoing in America. For the Sake of the Chil- parental divorce. HB-254 ______$26.95 dren, by Kris Kline and REVISED! SB-101 ______$15.00 Stephen Pew, 1992. Dis- Creating a Successful NEW! cusses how to share your Parenting Plan, by Dr. Jayne I Love You More Than..., by C. The Unexpected Legacy children with your ex- A. Major, 1998. Nationally Elizabeth Hickey and James of Divorce—A 25-Year spouse despite your anger. acclaimed author of “Break- Cohen. Illustrated by Lynda Landmark Study, by Judith Kline is CRC’s Florida coordi- through Parenting” and Smart Brown, 1998. S. Wallerstein, Julia M. Lewis, nator. PHOTOCOPIES ONLY! “Winning the Custody War HB-102 ______$16.95 and Sandra Blakeslee, 2000. HB-206 ______$9.00 Without Casualties” The best-selling book that SB-218 ______$24.95 A. It’s Not Your Fault, Koko says many children of di- NEW! Bear, by Vicki Lansky, 1998. vorce suffer long-term ef- E. This Child of Mine: A The Best Parent is Both Koko Bear can help children fects from divorce. Therapist’s Journey, by Parents: A Guide to Shared understand divorce and SB-200 ______$24.95 Martha Wakenshaw. Stories Parenting in the 21st Cen- sends a good message. of abused and neglected tury, the CRC book edited SB-107 ______$5.99 50/50 Parenting, by Gayle children who are travelling by David L. Levy, 1993. If you Kimball, Ph.D. Almost 300 the road to recovery. This would like copies (individual For Parents co-parents and 83 children book can help other abused or bulk order) autographed report on life in married, children to recover. by David L. Levy, just state to NEW! divorced, and step-family HB-209 ______$12.95 whom you would like it B. Divorce Poison, by Dr. situations. autographed (yourself, per- Richard Warsak, 2001. A SB-201 ______$9.95 Father and Child Reunion, haps your children—give leading authority on divorce by Warren Farrell, Ph.D. How their names). helps parents shield chil- to bring the dads we need SB-221 ______$10.00 dren from the crossfire of to the children we love. Order 10 copies or more separation and divorce. HB-251 ______$25.00 each only $4.00 HB-253 ______$26.00
F. G. H. I. J.
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 27 Catalog of Resources
K. L. M. N. O.
G. Throwaway Dads, by For Single Parents Legal Issues Parental Kidnapping Ross D. Parke and Armin A. Brott, 1999. The myths and J. Still a Dad, The Divorced NEW! Autographed Copies! barriers that keep men from Father’s Journey, by CRC’s L. From Courtship to They Are My Children, Too, being the fathers they want own Serge Prengel, 1998. Courtroom: What Divorce by Catherine Meyer, 1999. to be. “An essential guide Published with praise from Law Is Doing to Mariage, Powerful account of a not only for fathers, but for a Warren Farrell, Karen by Jed H. Abraham, 2000. mother’s loss of her children. culture that is not sure what DeCrow, and James A. Cook. Abraham, a lawyer, mediator, A case of international pa- to do with them” (Gurian, SB-2501 ______$13.95 and joint custody advocate, rental kidnapping. Written Michael) writes a chilling picture of by CRC’s new Honorary HB-248 ______$20.00 Surviving Divorce— how today’s divorce laws President. Women’s Resources After make life miserable for fami- HB-801 ______$23.00 For Stepparents Separation, by Mavis lies. Maclean. SB-701 ______$15.00 NEW! Stepfamilies Stepping HB-502 ______$5.00 N. Run to the Sun, by Rob- Ahead, edited by Mala Burt Custody for Fathers, by ert Davé, 20001. A novel of for the Stepfamily Associa- K. Fathers’ Rights, by Jeffrey Carleen and Michael suspense. The story of pa- tion of America. Leving. A best-selling book Brennan, 1994. Includes rental kidnapping, con- SB-303 ______$9.95 for fathers who want to more than 100 strategies spiracy and lies. maintain contact with their that have helped fathers win HB-803 ______$16.95 NEW! children. (share) custody of their chil- H. Step-Wives, by Lynne SB-510 ______$12.50 dren in a mom-biased sys- The Recovery of Interna- Oxhorn-Ringwood and tem. tionally Abducted Chil- Louise Oxhorn, 2002. Mediation/Conflict HB-705 ______$12.00 dren, by Maureen Dabbagh, Mothers and step-mothers Resolution 1997. This book is a guide, learn to get along for the The Father’s Emergency outlining the legal steps to sale of the child. Healing Hearts, Helping Guide to Divorce/Custody try to recover your interna- SB-340 ______$13.00 Children and Adults Re- Battle, A Tour Through the tionally abducted child. cover from Divorce, by Predatory World of Judges, Dabbagh provides advice on For Grandparents Elizabeth Hickey, M.S.W., Lawyers, Psychologists working with foreign attor- CRC’s National Parent Edu- and Social Workers in the neys and embassies, and I. Grandparents as Parents: cation Director, and Eliza- Subculture of Divorce, by gathering information on A Survival Guide for Rais- beth Dalton, attorney and Robert Seidenberg, with the the abductor. ing a Second Family, by mediator legal insights of Williams HB-804 ______$20.00 Sylvie de Toledo and HB-602 ______$15.00 Dawes, Esq., 1997. Deborah Edler Brown. A SB-707 ______$15.00 “how-to” manual for grand- parents who are raising their Authors & NEW! National grandchildren. M. Betrayal of the Child, by HB-403 ___ Reg. $17.00 Publishers Stewart Rein, 2001. A father’s Child guide to Family Courts. “A Advertise your book that refutes the single Access book here! parent theology and con- 100 additional cludes that only two parents Network books listed on Contact Mark Roseman at can serve the best interests Conference 203/288-7827, email: of children” (Dr. John www.gocrc.com [email protected] Chipingdon) See details, page 13. SB-710 ______$22.95
28 WWW.GOCRC.COM Catalog of Resources
Child Abuse Videos Reports Special CRC CD NEW! Children: The Experts on Interference with Access Ernie Ashworth and Elusive Innocence: Sur- Divorce, by Elizabeth Hickey, (Visitation) as a Tort. Up- Friends: Sing out For the vival Guide for the Falsely MSW 1994. The children dated 1997. Children’s Rights Council, Accused, by Dean Tong, speak from their own expe- R101 ______$10.00 Hadassah sings “Hear the 2001. “Elusive Innocence rience of going through Cries of the Children” should be a wake-up call to their parents’ divorce. Parenting Plans. Three dif- CD-101 ______$12.00 child advocates and law- V101 ______$25.00 ferent parenting plans. makers” — Kathleen Parker, R102 ______$10.00 Bumper Stickers nationally syndicated col- Don’t Forget The Children, umnist. by the Dallas, Texas Associa- Joint Custody as a Child’s P. The Best Parent is Both SB-911 ______$15.99 tion of Young Lawyers. A Right. More than 40 re- Parents, white printing on a CRC award-winning video search reports over the past black background. The Parental Alienation that provides information 15 years that show the posi- $1 apiece _ 6 for $5.00 Syndrome, A guide for on co-parenting in the event tive effects of co-parenting mental health and legal pro- of divorce. (joint custody) on children. Kits fessionals, by Richard V102 ______$20.00 Includes two joint custody Gardner, M.D., 1995. An au- legal briefs you can adapt Equal Parenting Week Kit, thoritative work on the Pa- Psychotherapeutic & Legal for use in court. Instructions, Suggested Ac- rental Alienation Syndrome. Approaches To Parental R103 ______$10.00 tivities, ribbons and button. SB-903 ______$35.00 Alienation Syndrome $10.00 (PAS), by Richard A. Gardner, O. Children Held Hostage, M.D. An in-depth discussion Dealing with Programmed of ways that parents can and Brainwashed Children, alienate the child against by Stanley S. Clawar, Ph.D., the other parent. C.C.S. and Brynne Rivlin, V103 ______$25.00 M.S.S., 1991. This book is approved by the American Bar Association. SB-905 ______$50.00 P. Catalog Order Form
CUSTOMER BILLING INFORMATION: Qty. Title Price (ea.) Total
Date of Order ______Name ______Address ______City ______(10% off for CRC members; State ______ZIP ______membership is $35/year, see form on page 26) ______
Daytime Phone ______Sub-Total ______S/H $4.00 first item ______Fax ______$1.00 each addtl. item ______E-mail ______Total enclosed ______SHIP TO: PAYMENT INFORMATION: (Please complete if delivery address is different from above.) ❑ Check: payable to CRC Name ______❑ Charge: Visa, MasterCard, AmEx Address ______Card # ______Exp. ______
City ______Signature ______
State ______ZIP ______Mail your order to Phone your order to Daytime Phone ______CRC Books CRC at 202/547-6227 300 “I” Street N.E., Suite 401 Fax your order to Fax ______Washington, D.C. 20002-4389 CRC at 202/546-4272 Order on the website at www.gocrc.com
SPEAK OUT FOR CHILDREN | SUMMER 2002 29 NATIONAL AFFILIATE ORGANIZATIONS AND CHAPTERS
INTERNATIONAL STATE CHAPTERS Illinois Michigan Dan Carrigan, director Texas CRC of Great Britain Alabama Terry Cady, coordinator Barbara Toth, coordinator Center for Children of Diana Buffington, CRC of Illinois CRC of Michigan Separation and Divorce coordinator Tony and Christine Coe, Tim Smith, president 905 Wayne Avenue P.O. Box 653 4950 Park Road CRC of Texas coordinators Alabama Family Rights Deerfield, IL 60015 Edmore, MI 48829-0653 Charlotte, NC 28209 3705 Billie Faye Drive Children’s Rights Council Association phone: 847/374-0461 phone: 517/427-5774 phone: 704/522-1331 N. Richland Hills, TX 76180 of the United Kingdom P.O. Box 9239 fax: 312/322-3553 fax: 704/342-0272 phone: 817/589-8395 38-40 Gloucester Road Huntsville, AL 35812 Minnesota email: terry.cady@ fax: 817/595-0860 London, SW7 4QU Phone: 1-800/992-1190 Bruce Kaskubar, Ohio dvi-inc.com e-mail: dbuffingcrctx@ England website: www.alfra.org coordinator Margaret Wuwert, netscape.net phone: 011-44-20 7589 9003 Indiana CRC of Minnesota coordinator Alaska website: www.community. fax: 011-44-20 7584 4230 Bob Monday, coordinator 5905 Chateau Road N.W. CRC of Ohio Gary Maxwell, dallasnews.com/dmn/crctx email: tonyc@ CRC of Indiana Rochester, MN 55901 4069 West Sylvania Avenue coordinator equalparenting.org 540 Crest Point Lane phone/fax: 507/289-5745 Toledo, OH 43623 Children’s Rights CRC of Alaska website: Plainfield, IN 46168 (call before faxing) phone: 419/473-8955 Coalition (affiliate) P.O. Box 92083 www.equalparenting.org phone: 317/685-4656 email: brucekaskubar@ fax: 419/472-1709 P.O. Box 12961 Anchorage, AK 99509-2083 email: pace_indiana@ deltakinetics.com tollfree: 1-866/473-8957 Capitol Station CRC of Japan phone: 907/277-3980 yahoo.com e-mail: hummelfan7@ Austin, TX 78711-2961 Walter Benda fax: 907/276-3980 Missouri aol.com fax: 215/499-8056 P.O. Box 583 email: [email protected] Grandparent Rights Scott Field, chair email: [email protected] Max Meadows, VA 24360 in New Strength CRC of Eastern Missouri Or contact: Arizona phone: 540/637-3799 (G.R.I.N.S.) P.O. Box 220661 Kevin O’Brien, director Virginia Conrad Greene, email: [email protected] Kay and Ray Berryhill, Kirkwood, MO 63122 CRC of Southern Ohio Murray Steinberg, coordinator website: co-directors phone: 314/963-4668 P.O. Box 8805 president CRC of Arizona www.geocities.com/ 0689 County Route 5 atl. phones: Scott 314/ Cincinnati, OH 45208 CRC of Virginia, P.O. Box 454 crcjapan Corunna, IN 46730 838-7092 phone/fax: 513/624-7223 Richmond chapter Scottsdale, AZ 85252-0454 and phone: 219/281-2384 Mark Holdenried 314/ email: kobrien@ 9244 Royal Grant Drive phone: 480/970-5903 David Brian Thomas 772-1169 pacegroup.org Mechanicsville, VA 23116 fax: 480/970-5925 Iowa—See Nebraska/ 4-18-15-903 Kamiki Tazawa Iowa email: crceasternmo@ website: phone: 804/559-7090 Setagaya-Ku California bigfoot.com www.pacegroup.org fax: 804/559-7072 Tokyo, Japan 156 Patricia Gehlen, Kentucky website: email: [email protected] James Welty, president phone: 011-81-3-5317-0357 coordinator Kevin O’Brien, coordinator www.hometown.aol.com/ CRC of Northeast Ohio Paul Robinson, president 11347 Gold Country Ann Swango, director crceasternmo/ CRC of Sierra Leone 2804 East Center Street Fathers United for Equal Boulevard CRC of Kentucky myhomepage/index.html Yottro Kargbo N. Kingsville, OH 44068 Rights and Women’s Golden River, CA 95670 P.O. Box 534 3505 Covered Bridge Lane Jim Moore, president phone: 440/224-0694 Coalition phone/fax: 916/635-2590 Florence, KY 41022-0534 Woodbridge, VA 22192 CRC of Southwestern P.O. Box 1323 email: [email protected] phone: 859/647-2235 Oregon phone/fax: 703/897-7845 Missouri Arlington, VA 22210-1323 email: [email protected] Roy Nolan, coordinator and Colorado 619 East Silsby phone: 703/451-8580 website: www.pacegroup.org CRC of Oregon Esther Kargbo Mark Entrekin, Springfield, MO 65807 fax: 703/451-9321 P.O. Box 2095 P.O. Box 988 coordinator Maine phone: 417/889-2121 email: [email protected] Portland, OR 97208 Freetown, Sierra Leone CRC of Colorado Tom Chandel email: jmatcrcswmo@ phone: 503/232-8630 Washington State phone: 011-23-2-22222-8682 4715 Ranch Circle CRC of Maine aol.com fax: 503/233-9390 Jamaica Filgo Colorado Springs, CO P.O. Box 7 Nebraska/Iowa CRC of Washington NATIONAL 80918-4118 Bridgton, ME 04009 Pennsylvania Lyn and William Huerter, 10011 33rd Avenue S.E., AFFILIATE phone: 719/548-8798 phone: 207/647-5711 Michael Nieland, M.D., coordinators Apt. A ORGANIZATIONS fax: 719/597-2218 fax: 207/647-8240 president Colleen Kavan, president Everett, WA 98208 email: [email protected] email: [email protected] CRC of Pittsburgh Mothers Without CRC of Nebraska phone: 425/379-9666 1400 Inverness Avenue Custody (MW/OC) Connecticut Maryland P.O. Box 45387 email: [email protected] Pittsburgh, PA 15217 Jennifer Isham, Mark Roseman, Harvey Walden, Omaha, NE 68145-0387 phone: 412/621-0222 West Virginia coordinator coordinator coordinator phone/fax: 402/330-3353 Ginger Thompson website only: www.mothers CRC of Connecticut CRC of Maryland email: [email protected] Rita A. Jones, president McDaniel withoutcustody.org 48 Shepards Knoll Drive 417 Pershing Drive website: www.crcne.org Bill Clemens, J.D., CRC of West Virginia Hamden, CT 06514 Silver Spring, MD 20910- treasurer Stepfamily New Jersey 109 North Arthur Drive phone/fax: 203/288-7827 4254 CRC of Philadelphia Association of Eric Purasson, president Charleston, WV 25312 email: [email protected] phone: 301/588-0262 P.O. Box 11413 America (SAA) New Jersey Council for phone: 304/744-6534 website: www.ctcrc.org email: [email protected] Philadelphia, PA 19111 Margorie Engel, Ph.D., Children’s Rights (NJCCR) fax: 304/744-8657 website: www.members. phone: 215/844-2372 president Delaware P.O. Box 391 email: [email protected] tripod.com/~mdcrc/ (Rita after 6 p.m.) or Larry Kallemyn, executive James A. Morning, Bloomsburg, NJ 08804- 215/745-0594 (Bill) Wyoming director president Rob and Sandra Snow, 0391 Cori Erickson 650 J Street, Suite 205 CRC of Delaware chairs phone: 201/434-7938 Kurt Krusen CRC of Wyoming Lincoln, NE 68508 P.O. Box 1311 CRC of Greater Baltimore email: epurasson@ CRC of Harrisburg/ 50 East Loucks Street, phone: 402/477-7837 Dover, DE 19901 2 West 39th Street hotmail.com Capitol Region Suite 206 1-800/735-0329 phone: 302/734-8522 Baltimore, MD 21218 website: www.njccr.org 15 Beaver Road Sheridan, WY 82801 Joint membership in SAA email: jmorning@ phone/fax: 410/889-9404 pro se website: Camp Hill, PA 17011 phone: 307/674-5595 and CRC: $35.00 for the bellatlantic.net email: [email protected] www.njprose.com phone: 717/763-0673 fax: 307/674-5510 first year fax: 717/763-7183 District of Columbia Massachusetts New York email: [email protected] email: kkrusendmv@ Parenting Coalition Frank Banner, coordinator Carolyn Brumber, Rafee Kamaal and aol.com International, Inc. CRC of the District coordinator Elizabeth Schnee, Belinda Rollins, president of Columbia CRC of Massachusetts co-presidents Randy Morkved, president CRC General Counsel 1025 Connecticut Avenue Hillcrest Children’s Center 16 Union Street CRC of New York City CRC of South Central CRC Michael L. Oddenino N.W., Suite 6156 1325 “W” Street N.W., Holiston, MA 01746 P.O. Box 1359 of South Central email: [email protected]; Washington, D.C. 20036 3rd floor phone: 508/429-5282 Cathedral Station Pennsylvania website: www.oanglaw.com phone: 202/530-0849 Washington, D.C. 20009 email: c.brumber@ New York, NY 10025 P.O. Box 151 Famly Law Attorney website: www.parenting phone: 202/232-6100 gateway.net hotline: 212/431-7724 Glenville, PA 17327 John L. Bauserman, Jr. coalition.org fax: 202/483-4560 phone: 212/864-0318 phone: 717/227-1213 Stave Carrier, president CRC Board Chairman email: crcnyc@ fax: 717/227-1828 CoMamas Florida CRC of Massachusetts email: [email protected] betterdivorce.com email: rlmork@ Louise Oxhorn and Lynne Kris Kline, coordinator 511 Main Street earthlink.net Oxhorn-Ringwood CRC of Florida P.O. Box 904 Marlin Pierce, GOOD NEWS! P.O. Box 231804 502 South Willow Avenue, Sturbridge, MA 01566 CRC of Albany South Carolina—See Lyn Huerter, who, Encinitas, CA 92023 Unit 5 phone: 508/347-5960 13 Campagna Drive North Carolina with her husband Bill, phone: 760/942-4572 Tampa, FL 33606 fax: 508/347-9870 Albany, NY 12205 Tennessee email: feelgood@ phone: 813/635-0633 email: [email protected] phone: 518/459-8474 runs Nebraska/Iowa David Courson, comamas.com fax: 813/620-9068 George Kelly, chairman North Carolina/ coordinator CRC, CRC’s largest website: email: [email protected] Concerned Fathers of South Carolina CRC of Tennessee chapter, is on the www.comamas.com Georgia Massachusetts, Inc. Fred Wall, Jr. coordinator 2120 Griffintown Road mend from laving Harry A. Prillaman, P.O. Box 2768 509 North 7th Street White Bluff, TN 31708-5207 suffered a stroke. coordinator Springfield, MA 01101-2768 Wilmington, NC 28401 phone/fax: 615/952-2498 Lyn, a grand- CRC of Georgia phone: 413/736-7432 phone: 910/762-4952 email: coursond@ 311 Apache Drive fax: 413/732-3867 email: [email protected] mtrmls.com mother, is constantly Canton, GA 30115 on the phone help- phone: 678/643-5924 ing parents with fax: 770/704-0917 custody problems. email: [email protected]
30 WWW.GOCRC.COM Child Custody Books the most current and authoritative books on child custody both litigation and healing and dealing books
Win Your Child Custody War Killers & Boosters (Child Custody Help SourceBook) for Child Custody Cases
Charlotte Hardwick has gathered countless re- Filled with well over 1,400 entries, this indispens- sources from her own successful battle for child able book provides those embroiled in a child custody in 1991. Since that time, she has added custody case a chance to reflect. Every information from the cases of hundreds of entry is a tidbit of advice, informa- others and included it in this all- tion, moral support or scrap of encompassing tome. With 23 wisdom meant to inform and chapters ranging from perjury to inspire. It’s the type of book court costs, this compendium that can be read straight of essential information is the through or picked up and put definitive how-to book for down when the need arises. winning your child custody war. This is your attorney, therapist It’s an in-depth and detailed and spiritual counselor encapsu- analysis of everything you need lated into one amazing book. to know in order to ensure success during the most important battle of your life.
Help and Where to Find It Dear Judge Kids’ Letters to the Judge More than 1,000 groups, associations, organizations and agencies across North Including 90 letters direct from America are fully indexed in this irreplaceable children’s hearts to judges’ desks, this guidebook of child custody litigants. If you’re in touching book brings to light the thoughts and need of help, you’ll be sure to find it with this easy- emotions of those most affected by child custody to-use resource organized in alphabetical order for battles. With poignancy and innocence, this your convenience. Included with each entry is a full collection of letters proves once and for all that description of their services along with how you children see, hear and feel more than most parents can contact them. Never again find yourself with give them credit for. Every divorced parent should nowhere to turn. read this book.
To order these and other great books, go online at www.custodywar.com
Pale Horse Publishing • P.O. Box 1447 • Livingston, TX 77351 Phone: 800/646-5590 • Fax: 936/967-8962 A Non-Profit, Tax Exempt Organization Strengthening Families and Assisting Children of Separation and Divorce Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage PAID Washington, D.C. 300 “I” Street NE • Suite 401 • Washington, DC 20002 Permit #881
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
our expiration date on label Please checkand renewy if appropriate.
“A BREAKTHROUGH BOOK.”*
In this essential book, clinical, research, and consulting psychologist Dr. Richard A. Warshak shows parents how to respond to a difficult or vindictive ex-spouse without harming their children. And Divorce Poison provides strategies to preserve and rebuild loving relationships between parents and children.
“This incredible book extends our understanding of parental alienation in a meaningful way. Every parent...will...learn from it. This powerful book will influence parents, professionals, courts, and legislatures for years to come.” —David L. Levy, J.D., president, Children's Rights Council
“With the wisdom and insight of years of professional experience, Dr. Warshak shows parents how to avoid the painful repercussions that result when a child becomes a pawn of parental conflicts. If you’re divorced and you love your child, read this book!” —Constance R. Ahrons, Ph.D., senior scholar, Council on Contemporary Families, and author of The Good Divorce
“Original, well-written, balanced, and filled with insights, it is perfect for any parent who has been the victim of bad-mouthing.” —Warren Farrell, Ph.D., author of Father and Child Reunion*
“Warshak skillfully draws attention to the devastating consequences of a poorly recognized form of child abuse...every divorcing parent should read Divorce Poison closely.” —Michael E. Lamb, Ph.D., head, Section on Social and Emotional Development National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
HARDCOVER • 0-06-018899-5 • 320 pp. • $26.00 ($39.50 Can.)
www.reganbooks.com ReganBooks. . . Not just the same old story. www.harperacademic.com