Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
Friday, January 23, 2015
Georgia - Increased oversight needed for troubled guardian ad litem program
Augusta Chronicle
The Augusta Chronicle has done the public a great favor by drawing attention to problems faced, and to some extent created, by guardians ad litem, who are appointed by courts to represent the interests of children in divorce cases.
SINCE GUARDIANS do not represent the divorcing parents, they serve an important but entirely different role than do attorneys for plaintiffs and defendants. Attorneys are trained in adversarial proceedings to argue the case for their clients. Guardians, like the children they represent, find themselves in the middle of difficult and often troubling circumstances.
And while guardians seek to discover the best possible solution for children of divorce, “best possible” is almost always “least hurtful,” because divorce hardly ever is without pain for the affected children.
For more than 12 years, I served as a guardian in the Augusta Judicial Circuit on cases assigned to me by more than 10 judges.
During part of that time I served also as president of the guardian association (now defunct), which attempted through its bylaws, training programs and other forms of assistance to ensure professional and ethical work by individual guardians.
Full story: Augusta Chronicle
Monday, September 1, 2014
Opinion: In Defense Of Self-Represented Litigants
A strong piece on the issues of having Pro Se litigants.
The Connecticut Law Tribune
Despite the economic barriers to justice faced by struggling Connecticut families, rising from the ashes of the highly charged public debates over how to reform the family courts is a shockingly insensitive outcry from court industry insiders demonizing the 85 percent of divorcing parents who have chosen to invest in their families instead of attorneys.
Tauck v. Tauck was perhaps the most inefficient and expensive trial in Connecticut family court history, spanning over five years, 600-plus filings, and ending in an 86-day trial in 2007 that played out before Judge Holly Abery-Wetstone on Middletown's Regional Family Trial Docket. According to the Hartford Courant, the family paid out some $13.3 million in fees to the dozens of legal industry professionals on the case, including $1.3 million paid (without challenge) to attorney Gaetano Ferro, the children's guardian ad litem.
For further reading: The Connecticut Law Tribune
The Connecticut Law Tribune
Despite the economic barriers to justice faced by struggling Connecticut families, rising from the ashes of the highly charged public debates over how to reform the family courts is a shockingly insensitive outcry from court industry insiders demonizing the 85 percent of divorcing parents who have chosen to invest in their families instead of attorneys.
Tauck v. Tauck was perhaps the most inefficient and expensive trial in Connecticut family court history, spanning over five years, 600-plus filings, and ending in an 86-day trial in 2007 that played out before Judge Holly Abery-Wetstone on Middletown's Regional Family Trial Docket. According to the Hartford Courant, the family paid out some $13.3 million in fees to the dozens of legal industry professionals on the case, including $1.3 million paid (without challenge) to attorney Gaetano Ferro, the children's guardian ad litem.
For further reading: The Connecticut Law Tribune
Sunday, March 30, 2014
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.
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.
Thursday, March 20, 2014
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.
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.
Monday, February 24, 2014
Maine - Child Custody - An appeal to Maine's Supreme Court: Dalton Vs. Dalton CUM-13-521
It isn’t often that most people have a chance to read an actual divorce and custody story that is being appealed to Maine’s Supreme Court, as we write this. Child custody appeals are relatively rare. Most people, who might wish to appeal, are intimidated by the process; many are discouraged by lawyers, who don’t wish to offend a lower court judge by asking a higher court to intervene and correct a decision. Then, there is the huge amount of work involved and the not inconsiderable expense.
The process starts with a heartfelt disagreement with a lower court judgment and with the handling of the law in that court. It requires courage to challenge a family court judgment. It also always embodies a determined love of one’s child (children). In effect the appellant is very publicly saying - but in polite legal language - to the court, “You are dead wrong! Your judgment is not only unfair but badly arrived at. The tools you are using and the reasoning process are seriously defective! I strongly protest!” How a skilled attorney approaches this problem and chooses the most important issues out of a welter of possible “plots, subplots and very involved stories” is a matter of legal judgment. Most of us, as parents and family would get lost in a morass of the details that go into a custody fight. The enclosed brief of this particular case demonstrates the vitally necessary partnership between lawyer and client. It is a union of “heart and courage” and ”head” - the level, focused intellectual crafting of the case essentials by a lawyer. It will be, I guarantee you, a most interesting and informative “read”.
We’ve been hearing from family members some of the unbelievable details of this case, Dalton vs Dalton, for just over a year. We have held our breath each time there has been a court hearing, hoping for fairness, for a reasonable turn of events, for a review of hard facts and for correction of a frightening nightmare of misperception being acted out in court. But the process seemed only to get worse as time went on. The extreme and inaccurate views of the court and a Guardian ad litem have, unfortunately, become ever more rigidly entrenched. Hence, the difficult decision to appeal.
We have to say, in no way to diminish this very troubling case, that from our experience with many other friends, the clumsy handling of this case in this court is, unfortunately, by no means unique. This case is a poster child for other very similar cases, and it is an urgent clarion call for urgently needed Family Court Reform in Maine. Like most Family Courts in America today, Maine’s courts are in the views of many, badly broken, dysfunctional and urgently in need of reconceptualization and reconstruction. They have lost their moorings in the law, and they are cruelly hurting many of the families and children that they are supposed to serve.
Please, read the enclosed pdf with the details of the Supreme Court Appeal and see what you think. By all means, share it with friends and legal professionals. Ask the questions: “Is this how our courts should function? Is this your image of what you would expect from a court in a democratic society?”
Finally, who is in charge, where’s the oversight?
To view the case click on the link - Dalton Vs. Dalton CUM-13-521
For more information please contact MeGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook
The process starts with a heartfelt disagreement with a lower court judgment and with the handling of the law in that court. It requires courage to challenge a family court judgment. It also always embodies a determined love of one’s child (children). In effect the appellant is very publicly saying - but in polite legal language - to the court, “You are dead wrong! Your judgment is not only unfair but badly arrived at. The tools you are using and the reasoning process are seriously defective! I strongly protest!” How a skilled attorney approaches this problem and chooses the most important issues out of a welter of possible “plots, subplots and very involved stories” is a matter of legal judgment. Most of us, as parents and family would get lost in a morass of the details that go into a custody fight. The enclosed brief of this particular case demonstrates the vitally necessary partnership between lawyer and client. It is a union of “heart and courage” and ”head” - the level, focused intellectual crafting of the case essentials by a lawyer. It will be, I guarantee you, a most interesting and informative “read”.
We’ve been hearing from family members some of the unbelievable details of this case, Dalton vs Dalton, for just over a year. We have held our breath each time there has been a court hearing, hoping for fairness, for a reasonable turn of events, for a review of hard facts and for correction of a frightening nightmare of misperception being acted out in court. But the process seemed only to get worse as time went on. The extreme and inaccurate views of the court and a Guardian ad litem have, unfortunately, become ever more rigidly entrenched. Hence, the difficult decision to appeal.
We have to say, in no way to diminish this very troubling case, that from our experience with many other friends, the clumsy handling of this case in this court is, unfortunately, by no means unique. This case is a poster child for other very similar cases, and it is an urgent clarion call for urgently needed Family Court Reform in Maine. Like most Family Courts in America today, Maine’s courts are in the views of many, badly broken, dysfunctional and urgently in need of reconceptualization and reconstruction. They have lost their moorings in the law, and they are cruelly hurting many of the families and children that they are supposed to serve.
Please, read the enclosed pdf with the details of the Supreme Court Appeal and see what you think. By all means, share it with friends and legal professionals. Ask the questions: “Is this how our courts should function? Is this your image of what you would expect from a court in a democratic society?”
Finally, who is in charge, where’s the oversight?
To view the case click on the link - Dalton Vs. Dalton CUM-13-521
For more information please contact MeGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook
Friday, September 13, 2013
GAL's...Huh...What Are They Good For? Absolutely Nothing!
Borrowing our title from the Edwin Starr/Temptations song denouncing war; there is a real problem for Guardian Ad Litem's: how to justify their existence? What do they add to a divorce (besides expense and harassment)? What do they know about parenting and a child's best interest? Is there an area of human relations expertise, and, if so, what is it?
Because their hypothetical expertise is highly debatable and at best very slim, they have to discover problems in parenting- problems that make their search appear valuable, but not so bad as to warrant a referral to Children's Protective Services and an escape of the money train.
They have gradually expanded their originally limited role to be a kind of Good Housekeeping certifier of parenting. They fundamentally offer an opinion grade of parents, like a school teacher. This one gets 100%, this one gets 35%; this one gets zero! Frequently, child's evaluation by experts is dismissed, and there is a search for an evaluator whose opinions agree with those of the GAL. Or the blanks in actual expert reports get filled in by the GAL with "junk science".
They have to find a problem to justify their existence.They have to rely on the power of the courts to back them and on their protection from liability by immunity to survive.
It is about an expensive investigation in search of a problem! It embodies the common approach (an accusation equals a fact) and common philosophical issues of other investigations in which the investigator's job security and professional existence depends on finding problems: the inquisition, the reign of terror, the Salem witch hunts and the search for Communists in public life of the 1950's!
For support please contact us at NatinoalGALalert@gmail.com or for current issues find us on Facebook.
Because their hypothetical expertise is highly debatable and at best very slim, they have to discover problems in parenting- problems that make their search appear valuable, but not so bad as to warrant a referral to Children's Protective Services and an escape of the money train.
They have gradually expanded their originally limited role to be a kind of Good Housekeeping certifier of parenting. They fundamentally offer an opinion grade of parents, like a school teacher. This one gets 100%, this one gets 35%; this one gets zero! Frequently, child's evaluation by experts is dismissed, and there is a search for an evaluator whose opinions agree with those of the GAL. Or the blanks in actual expert reports get filled in by the GAL with "junk science".
They have to find a problem to justify their existence.They have to rely on the power of the courts to back them and on their protection from liability by immunity to survive.
It is about an expensive investigation in search of a problem! It embodies the common approach (an accusation equals a fact) and common philosophical issues of other investigations in which the investigator's job security and professional existence depends on finding problems: the inquisition, the reign of terror, the Salem witch hunts and the search for Communists in public life of the 1950's!
For support please contact us at NatinoalGALalert@gmail.com or for current issues find us on Facebook.
Sunday, July 7, 2013
July 8 2013 - In the best interest of the Child - Guardian ad litem reform
Monday, July 8th is a day for Maine children and families dealing with some aspect of divorce, to celebrate. Against all odds, against our wildest expectations, in our first year of existence as "grass-roots" advocates, we have a comprehensive Guardian ad litem reform bill! And... believe it or not, Maine - dare I say it - is leading the country.
It isn't that other states haven't done bits and pieces of Guardian ad litem reform, a legislative "tweak" here or there, but, as we well know, all would-be "change agents" face awesome "headwinds". The opponents of Guardian ad litem reform as we know are truly formidable. The Guardians ad litem themselves, the family lawyers, the family court judges and the whole apparatus of the Judicial Branch, the infamous "stakeholders" know the system, know the existing law, are well organized professionally and have the financial resources to wage a political war.
But we have made good friends who have spoken the truth, ever more loudly....
We have an ever growing, much cherished group of NationalGALalert friends. We have bit by bit, using modern media, expanded our group, talked, shared and born witness to the horrors of a serious Guardian ad litem scandal in Maine's Judicial Branch. The Judicial Branch's Guardian ad litem program - with no oversight, no supervision and legal codes that have further re-enforced a lack of accountability - have pursued the self interest of its workers without visible restraint. And many children and their families have been badly hurt, as a result. Despite the very defensive claims of the Judicial Branch that it is about "bad sports", people who have had a bad custody decision, this has never been the focus of our issues. Our issues are about cruelty in decision making, ignorance in practice and blind greed. Our issues are about governing structures in the Guardian ad litem program that don't work, that fail the people who need them most. Our issues are about a Guardian ad litem program data base on sheets of paper in cardboard boxes in district courts, which the Supreme Court can't regularly access for management oversight. They don't know they don't know!
Our friends have courageously born witness in public, legislative testimony.
We now have an educated legislature that has full knowledge of the Guardian ad litem problems, thanks to yeoman's work by Senator David Dutremble, Representative Lisa Villa, Senator Linda Valentino and other members of the Judiciary Committee. We have a unanimous majority of the 35 members of the Maine Senate, who see the Guardian ad litem problem. It would be hard to find legislators in denial, after an awesome "educational session" with Senator Dutremble!
It is about everyone speaking the truth about the problem with simple courage.
It is also about support from the Executive Branch of our government: meetings of the Governor and constituents on Saturdays, as people poured out their hearts about personal victimization by Guardians ad litem, and the Governor listened. It is about Executive Branch participation in planning legislation from the first meeting in December 2012. It is about personal calls from the Governor to constituents, urging them to overcome their fears and testify to the Judiciary Committee on March 28, 2013. It is about the Governor signing the bill on July 8th.
At its core, it is an improbable story of "the power of the powerless", the power of "Truth" that can't be silenced, about courage and determination.
And ... friendship!
For more information please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or like us on Facebook. In addition if you would like to express your opinion on the cost of Guardian ad litem service of the performance of a GAL. We would encourage you to take our survey. The results will be published later this summer (2013). The surveys can be found - here - Cost Performance. Thank you.
Friday, May 10, 2013
Legislator’s illness delays guardian ad litem hearing on LD872
A legislative committee that was about to open discussions Thursday evening on a bill seeking to reform the state’s guardian ad litem program postponed the meeting after one of its members was taken away by ambulance.
The Judiciary Committee was in recess after hours of hearings on other bills, when Rep. Lisa Villa, D-Harrison, suddenly became ill.
Full story: PPH
Article is second one down
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Reform for guardians ad litem under way
This article came out on April 11, 2013.
Biddeford-Saco-OOB Courier
By Tracey Collins
Contributing Writer
BIDDEFORD – Eight years after his divorce, state Sen. David Dutremble (DDistrict 4) is lending his political support and personal experience to reform the laws that govern court-appointed guardians in family matters.
On March 28, Dutremble joined fellow lawmakers and citizens from York County to testify at a public hearing of the Maine State Judicial Committee in Augusta.
“Prior to my divorce I had never entered a courtroom as a defendant. I can assure you, the appointment of a guardian ad litem was one of the worst experiences of my life – and I am a full-time firefighter,” said Dutremble during his testimony.
The guardian appointed during his divorce suggested his work schedule as a veteran firefighter would not be healthy for his children and recommended he change jobs.
Since 1979, guardian ad litems have been appointed by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services under Title 22. In 1994, the statute was extended to include court appointed guardians in Title 19 family law matters. According to the judiciary, as the number of divorces and other stressful family matter cases have increased, so too have the needs for court-appointed parties to represent the best interest of children caught in the crossfire of contentious family matters, such as custody disputes. The problem, said Dutremble, is that the system is skewed to benefit the divorce industry, not the children caught in the middle.
Full story: Courier
Biddeford-Saco-OOB Courier
By Tracey Collins
Contributing Writer
BIDDEFORD – Eight years after his divorce, state Sen. David Dutremble (DDistrict 4) is lending his political support and personal experience to reform the laws that govern court-appointed guardians in family matters.
On March 28, Dutremble joined fellow lawmakers and citizens from York County to testify at a public hearing of the Maine State Judicial Committee in Augusta.
“Prior to my divorce I had never entered a courtroom as a defendant. I can assure you, the appointment of a guardian ad litem was one of the worst experiences of my life – and I am a full-time firefighter,” said Dutremble during his testimony.
The guardian appointed during his divorce suggested his work schedule as a veteran firefighter would not be healthy for his children and recommended he change jobs.
Since 1979, guardian ad litems have been appointed by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services under Title 22. In 1994, the statute was extended to include court appointed guardians in Title 19 family law matters. According to the judiciary, as the number of divorces and other stressful family matter cases have increased, so too have the needs for court-appointed parties to represent the best interest of children caught in the crossfire of contentious family matters, such as custody disputes. The problem, said Dutremble, is that the system is skewed to benefit the divorce industry, not the children caught in the middle.
Full story: Courier
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Family Courts - The Inquisition is Alive and Well
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.
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.
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.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
5th Amendment Rights being Violated in Divorce Cases
“Nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case be a witness against himself” These are one of the
the lofty, important human rights guaranteed to all US citizens by
our world famous Constitution. Yet in state after state these 5th
Amendment citizen rights are being violated by family courts, the
very institutions that are supposed to protect those rights. This has
been going on unnoticed by many for some time and has almost become
accepted as a regular way of doing business by the courts, Judges,
lawyers, officers of the courts and uninformed consumers.
What Judges are condoning- whether
directly or indirectly - is asking one or both people involved in a
custody to sign over their rights to privacy in confidential,
privileged transactions, without explaining how this confidential
information will be used- for or against the party. In the example
provided below, the judge has ordered the defendant to provide proof
of not only the attendance of counseling, but to allow the counselor
to speak with the Plaintiff on the Defendants progress.
 |
| Click on image for expanded view |
Why is this a violation of the
defendants 5th Amendment rights? There may be those who will say that
the defendant has a choice. He/ she does not have to agree to follow
the judge’s order. And this, in theory, would be true. In this
case, however, the defendant was faced with the following:
1. He/ She was threatened with contempt
of court and jail if he/ she did not comply
2. He/ She could agree with the release
of information to his/ her ex and the courts without knowing how his
therapy records might be used by the opposing attorney and the
alienated spouse: in his favor, or against him, to argue that he/she
was an unfit parent, should not have time with his/her child. He is
being asked to risk testifying against himself, if his therapy
records are released. Self-incrimination versus contempt of court
and jail. Tough choices!
Although both choices are horrible and
personally damaging, What would you do? In going to jail there is the
potential of losing one’s job, having a jail record and the loss of
income during jail time. These are all tangible concerns and fears.
We know what the potential consequences are in going to jail.
On the other hand by agreeing to the release of information, the "owner" of the information has no way of knowing in advance how that information is going to be used. It is impossible to give his/her “informed consent”, because it is impossible to know every possible or likely outcome of this action, and how it may affect your case. There is also no way to know that the information gained by the plaintiff and court will not be used as part of an attack by the plaintiff against the defendant. This is seen by many people as a sneaky, indirect way to get the defendant to testify against him/ herself. It is a violation of the defendants 5th Amendment rights, and it is all too frequently used by Judges that preside over family courts in custody disputes. It is also one of the many examples of how the Judicial process in family cases has corrupted itself. This process is in danger of becoming very ingrained in the system and it violates the constitutional 5th Amendment rights - to say nothing of common law principles about forcing consent.
The courts in the state are showing a
lack of respect for the privileged, confidential information that is
conveyed between the therapist and patient as an absolutely
necessary part of therapy. In this case (as well as many others that
we are aware of) under the threat of contempt of court, the
defendant buckled and was forced into making a “release of
information” decision that had ramifications that the Judge,
plaintiff and most of all defendant had no way of knowing how it
would play out. The Judge was in effect telling the defendant that
he/ she would have to potentially testify against him/ her self –
thus violating their rights under the constitution. The judge also
unwittingly destroyed therapy by destroying the confidentiality
necessary to make therapy work!
If you have had issues or if things
about your case just don't seem right with your Guardian ad litem –
please contact us for support at MeGALalert@gmail.com or like us on
Facebook to stay up to date on issues and events. We encourage your
thoughts on this subject please feel free to respond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)