The Spanish Inquisition relied on denunciations that were anonymous - the courts tortured and condemned heretics - depriving them of their worldly belongings. In many cases these heretics were executed as a means of saving their souls.
Several hundred years later we have the family court system that is alive and well in the state feeding off of the stress, pain and confusion of parents. While modern society has progressed beyond the physical torture to purify the soul our courts and officers of the courts have perfected psychological torture as a means to purify parents and keep them in line. It is warped thinking on the part of an industry that has grown by leaps and bounds over the past decade as Judges have outsourced their powers to the courts underlings - Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators - modern societies inquisitors.
While the names have changed the role has not. Modern inquisitors (Guardians ad litem, Parental Coordinators, Family Lawyers and the special interests) use the power that Judges have lent them and expanded upon that gift. Taking common sense and squeezing every drop of sense out so that people entering the court system are entering a system that is twisted and insane. Where all the rules of human decency are thrown out and where hearsay is fact when uttered by Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators. No where else but in today’s court is it acceptable for people to burn a child, abuse them, deprive a child of their childhood and time with one or both parents. All of this is done with the shield of "In the child's best interest" being used to protect warped reasoning and violating your Constitutional rights.
Think about this - in reviewing the actions of your Guardian ad litem or Parental Coordinator how open minded have the courts been in listening to you? Do you really believe the courts and the Inquisitors that work for them will change? In almost 40 years of having Guardians ad litem mixed up in the court system the only solid change that has come about has not been for the child or parents. Change has come for the benefit of the Guardian ad litem at the expense of your child(ren) and yourself. To believe that the courts are now capable of reform and have the ability to move from the card board box age into the digital age of management and oversight and you are just kidding yourself. Change is in the air not because of the realization our benevolent courts system have but because those forced into the use of the courts inquisitors have started to fight back. Any meaningful change to the system has to involve all parties - or the system will fail like it has for the past 4 decades.
Please contact us at MeGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook for more information.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Out Sourcing of Judicial Powers or Violation of Constitutional Rights by Guardians ad litem
Our Courts are asking for trouble in letting Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators decide whether a child(ren) spend more time with one parent over another. Parents should not be put into a position of having to prove whether or not they are fit. It is also an abuse of judicial power by the courts, Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators if you as a parent are in fear of losing you child(ren). Our Judges tolerate and are encouraged to outsource their role to Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators. These quasi-judicial officers will quite often force parents into expensive investigations and examinations. This is a violation to be free of governmental/ judicial obstruction in the private lives of citizens.
Maine's Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators have been working with no oversight or accountability. There are quite a few in the state that have pushed the boundaries of their role to the point of abuse - Judicial Abuse, Guardian ad litem abuse and Parental Coordinator abuse. Your rights as a citizen as a parent in going through divorce are no less because of the circumstance of divorce. Yet time and again we have seen the basic rights that we often times take for granted - taken away or worse given away. The courts treat criminals with more respect and take great pains so as to not infringe on their basic rights. Yet divorcing parents are not given this same respect given to criminals.
You as a parent can do something about this. We encourage you to call your representative and tell them your story of Judicial Abuse. That our courts have failed us and to put oversight of Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators into the hands of this system is placing accountability in a branch of government that lost any respectable vision of what is right or wrong years ago. Our courts pander to the special interest that we have entrusted with protecting out children. Parents as a result suffer and pay for this.
Our Constitutional rights have and are being violated by court officers. This has been going on for years. It is time to take back what has been lost because it is in your child's best interest. Please contact us at NationalGALalert@ gmail.com or find us on Facebook for up to date dialogue on reforming the Guardian ad litem system in the state.
Maine's Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators have been working with no oversight or accountability. There are quite a few in the state that have pushed the boundaries of their role to the point of abuse - Judicial Abuse, Guardian ad litem abuse and Parental Coordinator abuse. Your rights as a citizen as a parent in going through divorce are no less because of the circumstance of divorce. Yet time and again we have seen the basic rights that we often times take for granted - taken away or worse given away. The courts treat criminals with more respect and take great pains so as to not infringe on their basic rights. Yet divorcing parents are not given this same respect given to criminals.
You as a parent can do something about this. We encourage you to call your representative and tell them your story of Judicial Abuse. That our courts have failed us and to put oversight of Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators into the hands of this system is placing accountability in a branch of government that lost any respectable vision of what is right or wrong years ago. Our courts pander to the special interest that we have entrusted with protecting out children. Parents as a result suffer and pay for this.
Our Constitutional rights have and are being violated by court officers. This has been going on for years. It is time to take back what has been lost because it is in your child's best interest. Please contact us at NationalGALalert@ gmail.com or find us on Facebook for up to date dialogue on reforming the Guardian ad litem system in the state.
Conn. considers court advocates for animals
boston.com
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Man’s best friend is lawyering up.
Although animal cruelty laws have been on the books for over a century in some states, only recently has the idea of legal representation for animals started to be taken seriously. The most high-profile instance was the guardian-special master appointed in 2007 to represent the interests of 48 dogs in the Michael Vick dogfighting case.
And the practice seems to be catching on. The Connecticut legislature is considering introducing the notion of animal advocates to its court system after Rhode Island made a similar move last year. State lawmakers have discussed making them available in pet custody disputes as well as in animal abuse cases.
That prospect has animal rights supporters across the country optimistic that the practice could catch on. They say it reflects not only an attempt to reduce animals’ suffering but also a growing recognition that humans’ welfare is intimately linked to that of animals. But lawyers and even some veterinarians question the wisdom of starting down what they call a ‘‘slippery slope.’’
David Favre, a law professor at the University of Michigan, says it is almost always at the judge’s discretion about whether to consider how a ruling affects involved animals. Appointing an advocate would create a regular system for incorporating their interests into court proceedings.
Full story: boston.com
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Man’s best friend is lawyering up.
Although animal cruelty laws have been on the books for over a century in some states, only recently has the idea of legal representation for animals started to be taken seriously. The most high-profile instance was the guardian-special master appointed in 2007 to represent the interests of 48 dogs in the Michael Vick dogfighting case.
And the practice seems to be catching on. The Connecticut legislature is considering introducing the notion of animal advocates to its court system after Rhode Island made a similar move last year. State lawmakers have discussed making them available in pet custody disputes as well as in animal abuse cases.
That prospect has animal rights supporters across the country optimistic that the practice could catch on. They say it reflects not only an attempt to reduce animals’ suffering but also a growing recognition that humans’ welfare is intimately linked to that of animals. But lawyers and even some veterinarians question the wisdom of starting down what they call a ‘‘slippery slope.’’
David Favre, a law professor at the University of Michigan, says it is almost always at the judge’s discretion about whether to consider how a ruling affects involved animals. Appointing an advocate would create a regular system for incorporating their interests into court proceedings.
Full story: boston.com
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Parental Rights being Routinely Violated by Guardians ad litem and Judges
Are divorcing parents being discriminated against by Guardians ad litem and the courts? There have been and are cases in Maine where there has been unwarranted removal of a child from one parent to another. In doing so the Guardian ad litem and by default the courts are preventing a parent from exercising their parental rights. These rights are protected substantively under the Constitution of the Untied states.
When a Guardian ad litem makes this kind of recommendation to the courts and the courts enforces this recommendation (as we have seen time and again) - placing a child under primary control of one parent. It is being done so through the use of unchecked and unsubstantiated use of the state's power. This is discriminatory and prevents a parent from passing on his/ her beliefs to their child(ren).
For more information please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook for up to date information and ideas.
When a Guardian ad litem makes this kind of recommendation to the courts and the courts enforces this recommendation (as we have seen time and again) - placing a child under primary control of one parent. It is being done so through the use of unchecked and unsubstantiated use of the state's power. This is discriminatory and prevents a parent from passing on his/ her beliefs to their child(ren).
For more information please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook for up to date information and ideas.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Do Stakeholders in Maine Board of Overseers have your Best Interest?
In 1978
the The
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar was created by the Supreme
Court of Maine. It is a private organization entrusted with the
responsibility of oversight of Maine's lawyers. It is the only
private organization that offers oversight of any group and or
organization in the state.
The
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar is also being endorsed by the
Judiciary, Family Lawyers and Guardians ad litem as a means of
offering oversight and management of Guardians ad litem. March 28,
2013 saw testimony from many people – almost exclusively those that
endorsed the idea of oversight of Guardians ad litem through the
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar were lawyers. Or they had a law
background. Those that opposed the idea of using The Maine Board of
Overseers of the Bar were parents.
The
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar has been used by consumers to
complain about a lawyer they felt acted with impropriety. Not one
made it by the initial “gate keeper” - the person who decides
whether or not your concern is worthy enough to be heard. It is a
highly legal process and is a dream for anyone in the legal
profession. This is being endorsed and lobbied by stakeholders (are
like stockholders and have a financial interest) – by those who
have every reason for supporting the idea of Guardian ad litem
management and complaints with the Maine Board of Overseers of the
Bar. The following are those that may have an interest in the Board
of Overseers and the regulation of Guardians ad litem through that
private agency – the question you should ask is if they have your
interest at hand:
This
list is by no means complete but it does call into question whether
your interests and concerns are really being heard. Or will the
special interest of those who stand to lose should an equitable
process of management and oversight finally come to Maine. You be the
Judge and tell us and tell your Representatives what you think is
right. Maine GAL alert encourages you to comment on this blog through
email at NationalGALalert@gmail.com
or find us on Facebook.
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Is this a Violation of Maine's Constitution by Judiciary and Guardians ad litem
The following letter suggest that there are serious issues with regards to LD522 and whether if it is implemented would be a violation of Maine's Constitution. This is not the first time where we have seen what would be an infringement of ones Constitutional rights here in Maine. This though holds the potential of being on a much larger scale.
April 10, 2013
Maine Judicial Committee
100 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333
Dear Judicial Committee Member,
Please find within a friendly reminder regarding LD 522; upon accepting your State of Maine Government position, you took an oath and made a pledge to up hold both the Maine and United States Constitutions.
The Maine Constitution is very direct and clear that powers and responsibilities delegated to the Legislator, Governor, and Judicial Branch cannot be under any circumstances sub-delegated.
Whereas, LD 522 clearly does in fact sub delegated the responsibilities and power of oversight regarding Guardian Ad Litem’s to a private and non-government entity; being the Board of Overseers of the Maine Bar.
Therefore, as a member of this judicial committee, you have a responsibility and must reject LD522 and if it should be move forward to the State House and Senate floor; could be a possible act in clear violation of the Maine Constitution. If for some reason, should LD522 be forward to the House and Senate floor; it must contain a proper disclosure that it may be in violation of the Maine Constitution.
I personally find it very troubling that some committee members whom should have a commanding knowledge of the Maine Constitution; would even consider supporting LD 522. Moreover, what is even more troubling is that LD522, was recommended by the Judicial Branch, which should have clearly known that these government powers and responsibilities cannot be sub-delegated to the board of overseers of the Maine Bar!
Another major U.S. Constitutional issue is the sub-delegation of powers in granting immunity or quasi - immunity to attorneys, or guardian ad litems that only represent individuals or a small group of individuals of the general public is prohibited; compare to attorneys that represents the vast majority of the general public with Constitutional rights which is acceptable. Therefore, LD 522 granting guardian ad litem quasi – immunity is in clear conflict with the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court opinion’s which have made it very clear as whom can be granted immunity and quasi-immunity. Therefore those attorneys, or guardian ad litems which only represent a child, or small group of children in a particular family will not qualify for any type of immunity, or quasi - immunity.
In closing, this committee should not recommend or allow LD522 to continue on to the floor of the Maine House, or Senate; due to what appears to be major Constitutional violations and conflicts.
Respectfully submitted by,
R Baizley
If you have an interest in bringing about Guardian ad litem reform please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook.
April 10, 2013
Maine Judicial Committee
100 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333
Dear Judicial Committee Member,
Please find within a friendly reminder regarding LD 522; upon accepting your State of Maine Government position, you took an oath and made a pledge to up hold both the Maine and United States Constitutions.
The Maine Constitution is very direct and clear that powers and responsibilities delegated to the Legislator, Governor, and Judicial Branch cannot be under any circumstances sub-delegated.
Whereas, LD 522 clearly does in fact sub delegated the responsibilities and power of oversight regarding Guardian Ad Litem’s to a private and non-government entity; being the Board of Overseers of the Maine Bar.
Therefore, as a member of this judicial committee, you have a responsibility and must reject LD522 and if it should be move forward to the State House and Senate floor; could be a possible act in clear violation of the Maine Constitution. If for some reason, should LD522 be forward to the House and Senate floor; it must contain a proper disclosure that it may be in violation of the Maine Constitution.
I personally find it very troubling that some committee members whom should have a commanding knowledge of the Maine Constitution; would even consider supporting LD 522. Moreover, what is even more troubling is that LD522, was recommended by the Judicial Branch, which should have clearly known that these government powers and responsibilities cannot be sub-delegated to the board of overseers of the Maine Bar!
Another major U.S. Constitutional issue is the sub-delegation of powers in granting immunity or quasi - immunity to attorneys, or guardian ad litems that only represent individuals or a small group of individuals of the general public is prohibited; compare to attorneys that represents the vast majority of the general public with Constitutional rights which is acceptable. Therefore, LD 522 granting guardian ad litem quasi – immunity is in clear conflict with the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court opinion’s which have made it very clear as whom can be granted immunity and quasi-immunity. Therefore those attorneys, or guardian ad litems which only represent a child, or small group of children in a particular family will not qualify for any type of immunity, or quasi - immunity.
In closing, this committee should not recommend or allow LD522 to continue on to the floor of the Maine House, or Senate; due to what appears to be major Constitutional violations and conflicts.
Respectfully submitted by,
R Baizley
If you have an interest in bringing about Guardian ad litem reform please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook.
Monday, April 1, 2013
LD522 - Why it hurts Maine's Families and Children - Why lawyers love it
On Thursday March 28th in testimony to the Judiciary Committee a number of people made excellent suggestions about controlling Guardian ad litem costs and fees. Means testing, fee caps, regular bill reporting and ... oversight of billing by the management of the Judicial Branch would go a long way towards correcting the freewheeling ways of Guardians ad litem. As we know, these ideas are fairly simple - and not rocket science. Finance and many other Guardian ad litem issues should be fairly simple as no cost problems to fix.
The Judicial Branch faces a significant political problem. Make that HUGE. The political base, the support system, of the Judicial Branch is composed of the Legal Guild, lawyers, Guardians ad litem and Judges. Asking - or demanding - that any part of this base take a smaller, financial cut in divorce cases might be expected to result in a mass disaffection on the part of the Judicial Branch legal guild political base. It might cost the Judicial Branch the political support of the Legal Guild and the divorce industry. It could result in profound alienation of this Guild base with political consequences for the Judicial Branch leadership. The Guardian ad litem reform movement threatens to disrupt the previous balance between Judicial Branch management and their affluent, powerful base - the divorce industry.
This Judicial Branch - lawyer political dynamic might explain the powerful, under the radar opposition to real people oriented Guardian ad litem reform.
The care and feeding of its lawyer base is one explanation about why the Judicial Branch always seems to defer to its "stakeholders", the divorce industry, lawyers and Guardians ad litem. It may explain why the Judicial Branch allows its divorce industry "stakeholders" to dominate most of its planning committees for Guardian ad litem reform, such as the one from last Summer. It leaves the Judicial Branch paralyzed in the present situation and may explain why it does nothing - or at best the bare minimum. Pressure from the divorce industry not to change versus pressure from the "grass-roots" to change. The Judicial Branch is caught in a terrible bind.
The members of the divorce industry, including Guardians ad litem, make significant amounts of money off of divorcing couples. It is a multi-million dollar industry. Restrictions on the divorce industry of any kind could reduce their incomes. The current situation and its dynamics are in some ways similar to the robber barons of 19th century American history.
LD 522 is nothing less than a license to steal and plunder. It favors the legal Barons; not divorcing families and children. It is a gift from the Judicial Branch to its lawyer base. It allows the predatory wolves to keep their sheep's clothing!
It will require significant political pressure and moral pressure to overcome this resistance to change for the benefit of our Maine children and families.
For information on how to help stop LD522 from passing contact us at MeGALalertt@gmail.com or find up to date information on Facebook.
The Judicial Branch faces a significant political problem. Make that HUGE. The political base, the support system, of the Judicial Branch is composed of the Legal Guild, lawyers, Guardians ad litem and Judges. Asking - or demanding - that any part of this base take a smaller, financial cut in divorce cases might be expected to result in a mass disaffection on the part of the Judicial Branch legal guild political base. It might cost the Judicial Branch the political support of the Legal Guild and the divorce industry. It could result in profound alienation of this Guild base with political consequences for the Judicial Branch leadership. The Guardian ad litem reform movement threatens to disrupt the previous balance between Judicial Branch management and their affluent, powerful base - the divorce industry.
This Judicial Branch - lawyer political dynamic might explain the powerful, under the radar opposition to real people oriented Guardian ad litem reform.
The care and feeding of its lawyer base is one explanation about why the Judicial Branch always seems to defer to its "stakeholders", the divorce industry, lawyers and Guardians ad litem. It may explain why the Judicial Branch allows its divorce industry "stakeholders" to dominate most of its planning committees for Guardian ad litem reform, such as the one from last Summer. It leaves the Judicial Branch paralyzed in the present situation and may explain why it does nothing - or at best the bare minimum. Pressure from the divorce industry not to change versus pressure from the "grass-roots" to change. The Judicial Branch is caught in a terrible bind.
The members of the divorce industry, including Guardians ad litem, make significant amounts of money off of divorcing couples. It is a multi-million dollar industry. Restrictions on the divorce industry of any kind could reduce their incomes. The current situation and its dynamics are in some ways similar to the robber barons of 19th century American history.
LD 522 is nothing less than a license to steal and plunder. It favors the legal Barons; not divorcing families and children. It is a gift from the Judicial Branch to its lawyer base. It allows the predatory wolves to keep their sheep's clothing!
It will require significant political pressure and moral pressure to overcome this resistance to change for the benefit of our Maine children and families.
For information on how to help stop LD522 from passing contact us at MeGALalertt@gmail.com or find up to date information on Facebook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)