Will your online petition make people aware of the issue?

You are upset because the system has betrayed you - you want to take action and show that they are wrong, corrupt or biased. What do you do - get an online petition going to show the powers that there is a problem and that people back you up. Before you go to one of many sights that offer up online petitions are you prepared to do some hard thinking and ask yourself some difficult questions before posting that petition?

Some things to think about while you contemplate the idea:

GOALS: It is critically important to have clear aims for any petition.  Who are you petitioning?  Exactly what do you want them to do?  Do they have the legal power/authority to do it?  Are they apt to respond to an Internet petition?  Have they ever responded to a similar petition like yours before?  Have you tried other methods to solve the problem about which you are petitioning?

NUMBERS NEEDED? How many petitioners do you think you can get to sign your petition?  Beyond your family and friends are there a large number of people who understand the issues you are raising and who will back you because they share the  views you express in the petition?  How many signers will you need to have any significance?  For an in-state project, it might take several thousand signers before anyone takes notice.  For a national project you will need hundreds and hundreds of thousands.  You are aiming to make a grass roots statement of political power.  Can you get the numbers to "speak" power? How?  Large organizations and governments don't respond to midgets.

DEFAULT POSITION: If the petition falls flat- with little to no response or action- what is your fallback plan?  Shouldn't you have other ideas in mind, or do you just drop it?

RISK MANAGEMENT: What are the risks for you and others who might sign an Internet petition?  Have you run the petition idea by your lawyer and/or others with experience?  Is it well-written and clear; does it avoid name calling or slander?  Have you considered whether the petition will make matters better or worse?  What if it fails to get the desired response?  Will it improve or damage your image, your credibility, your thinking, your ideas, your original aim?  Are there legal ramifications that can come back to bite you and those who sign the petition?  If the petition fails in its expressed aims will there be backlash?  Will it infuriate others in the system you are petitioning - and cause them to close their ranks?

DISTRACTION: Is the petition a waste of time in the sense of being a time-consuming distraction from actual things you might do with less risk and greater potential payoff?  Are you avoiding the hard emotional work that might have greater benefit?

Getting 25 or 50 of your friends to sign your petition is probably useless. They are signing it just for that reason - being your friend or family member. On the other hand if you talk with 25 or 50 strangers of which some end up signing is in the end more beneficial to your cause. You have created an awareness of your issue which you can then build upon. To put it another way - a person in power can ignore hundreds or even thousands of signatures. It becomes harder though to ignore 25, 30 or more who are screaming at their door - writing letters and becoming involved in your cause.

REMEMBER: The American Revolutionary players tried unsuccessfully to petition King George.  The fallback position was the Committees of Correspondence and then the  Revolutionary War.

Connecticut - Public Service Announcement - Guardians ad litem have feelings please be sensitive

Recently Guardians ad litem have come under intense scrutiny in Connecticut for their actions in family court. They are crying that the role is mis-understood by consumers and the public in general. It is so bad that Guardians ad litem have asked to be withdrawn from cases. Is this because they feel that in doing so it is in the best interest of the child(ren) they represent? Or because for the first time their actions are coming under more scrutiny? Presented here are two articles from the Connecticut Law Tribune:

GALs Are Withdrawing From Cases As Court Reform Tensions Grow

Connecticut Law Tribune

Increasingly angry tactics have been pervading the public inquiry into family court custody reform, triggering a fight-or-flight response from top members of the family bar.

Some are ready to throw in the towel, or at least take a long time out.

Dozens of lawyers who work as guardians ad litem (GALs) or attorneys for minor children are in the process of withdrawing their representation, or are no longer accepting such appointments.

For example, in the past 30 days, Steven Dembo, of Hartford's Berman, Bourns, Aaron & Dembo, has asked to withdraw from four of his eight Guardian ad litem appointments. The requests are due in part to increasing attacks of the work done by Guardians ad litem on Internet websites and Facebook pages highlighting problems in Connecticut's family courts.

Full story: The Connecticut Law Tribune

Editorial: Legislature Considers Guardian Ad Litem Reform

The Connecticut Law Tribune

Appointed by judges to represent the interests of children in custody disputes, Guardians ad litem typically operate below the radar of public opinion. But in recent weeks, they have come under a microscope.

GALs were a focal point of a state task force looking into family court costs. They are primary targets of advocates who say they are upset that custody disputes have become far too expensive for the average person to wage, and that GAL fees reaching $30,000 or more are unconscionable.

They have captured the attention of legislators, some of whom have already expressed determination to increase oversight of GALs. And they have prompted a rare newspaper column by the state's chief justice, who agrees that some reforms are needed.

Full story: The Connecticut Law Tribune

It is well worth reading the comments posted by others.

Connecticut - Opinion: Family Court System Expensive, Inefficient And Abusive

Connecticut Law Tribune

On Feb. 26, there was a historic vote at the state Capitol in which family court Judge Leslie Olear was only narrowly reappointed by the legislature. This vote came after public protests which gained media attention and after legislators were called into action to address the serious problems in our state's family courts. After this vote, some members of the legal community understandably rushed to defend Judge Olear, claiming that the votes against her were politically motivated and only in response to complaints being expressed by a "small number of family court critics." This is simply not the case.

This vote came after scores of parents, adult children of divorce, grandparents, attorneys and business executives testified until the early morning hours in front of a task force in January, after more than 630 parents signed a petition demanding legislative reforms of the family court's broken guardian ad litem (GAL) system, and after legislators were inundated with thousands of complaints about our family courts from parents, as consumers of the family court system's services.

Full story: Connecticut Law Tribune


Related stories:
Connecticut Law Tribune - Opinion: Judge Became Pawn In Debate Over Family Court Issues

Connecticut - Opinion: Judge Became Pawn In Debate Over Family Court Issues

Kim Knox opens with placing the blame of the parent/ consumer and not on the Judges - especially not the 'Honorable Leslie Olear' who - because of circumstance finds herself on the hot seat. As the old saying indicates "what goes around comes around" - it would appear 'Honorable Leslie Olear' is getting what she deserves.

Connecticut Law Tribune

The Honorable Leslie Olear came before the General Assembly for reappointment on Feb. 26, having served the previous eight years with a stellar record. By all accounts, she is the type of judge that Connecticut deserves and needs: smart, hard-working and committed to doing what is fair and just.

But Olear had the misfortune of being a sitting family law judge when the reappointment vote was cast, and thus became a pawn in a highly charged, politically sensitive debate over structural issues in the family courts – a debate in which a small number of family court critics appear to be using the reappointment process as a means to give voice to their dissatisfaction about the functioning of that all-important docket within the Judicial Branch.

Full story: Connecticut Law Tribune

Related stories:
Connecticut - Opinion: Family Court System Expensive, Inefficient And Abusive

Washington - Families' futures decided with little oversight

This article puts into perspective the issues that surround parent evaluators, Guardians ad litem and other court sanctioned divorce industry businesses/ people. Quite often the methods used in testing parents are questionable relying on junk science or psycho-eugenics to determine a parents ability to parent.



Seattle PI

In the field of family law, a little-examined group of professionals has enough influence to separate fathers from children and relegate mothers to weekends-only status, based on little more than an opinion.

So-called parent evaluators need no particular credentials or training. They may use any method they wish, charge what they please and remain virtually free of oversight. Yet their word can upend families in a single stroke.

In recent decades, as dockets have become clogged with warring parents battling for custody of their children, overwhelmed judges have turned increasingly toward this cluster of psychologists and social workers for guidance. But as there is almost no check on their influence, any human foible might result in a faulty or unfair report -- with enormous implications for those families under the microscope.

Full story: Seattle PI

For more information please find us on Facebook or email us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com.