THE ULTIMATE BLUNDER

Psychologists, Courts, Child protection workers, Guardians

Aristotle once said: All human actions have one or more of these seven causes: chance, nature, compulsions, habit, reason, passion, desire. 

Understanding the individual is in recognizing every soul has a purpose, a reason for being, finding the nerve to recognize and act on the obstacles in your path, doesn't require a psychologist, it requires finding one person and it only takes one who believes in you; who pushes you to take chances; “Everyone’s a prisoner until they ask questions and find the answers.” "Socrates"

Finding the answers your looking for in a person that has the same causes for existence as you do? Psychology/Psychiatry is the only medical profession that allows their members to treat ailments that their very boards do not recognize and provide drugs to treat these ailments, be very wary of the drugs it offers your children.    

Fraud, oh I mean, Freud once said "Analysis does not set out to make pathological reactions impossible, but to give the patients ego freedom to decide one way or another.

Meaning all psychologist's react and act within a realm of undefined measures against what is reality as their ego dictates; where analysis does not make pathological reactions "impossible"; analysis by the Psychologist/Psychiatrist "does make reactions pathological" - because Freud also once said "Every normal person, in fact, is only normal on the average. His ego approximates to that of the psychotic in some part or other and to a greater or lesser extent."

That being said or analyzed; whenever a social worker pushes a Court to get a psychological assessment on any one to submit to a court, be prepared because, the father of modern psychology Freud said "every" normal person, even the most rounded upstanding citizen is psychotic in some part or other that would include; the person testing, the social worker, and the Judge, ALL of whom will have a number of "pathology's"; because not to have them would in fact be deemed abnormal; the problem comes in when a social worker and/or a Judge tries to interpret test results behind closed doors - an area where only gray can exist, that becomes twisted and obscene upon the observer, over the dissection, because the Father of modern psychology says so.

What the courts do not ascertain and cross exam is that All human actions have one or more causes and they do not bother to acknowledge which one it was chance, nature, compulsions, habit, reason, passion, desire? What triggered it? What feeds into the formula in a forum that accepts heresay without factual evidence?  How do you determine the fitness of parent, when a report done by some person who has viewed/interviewed the person for a few short hours against a standardized test with results tested and formulated around inmates; really the average person may have run into a chance exception, or wasn't truly in their nature, a compulsion caused by trauma, a habit, inability to reason at precise moment, driven by blinded passion or desire, lack of education, and then for what purpose what is the why? Perhaps it was for none of the above because not enough question's were asked on ALL sides; what if it never existed - they are innocent and in a state of turmoil due to separation from their child is that exam still valid?  What if a Child is separated from their parent should their outward behavior be ruled as unacceptable and should they be drugged to prevent them from asking about their parents, family, siblings and friends? That would be expecting and accepting the improbability that the child's behavior doesn't stem from grief, depression, anguish and loss.

Now what about that truly evil person who should not be a parent - the one who knows how to take the standardized test and it shows that their nature, compulsion, habit, ability to reason, passions and/or desires, as well as their education does NOT support the findings and real facts we all come to associate with the American Justice system; because they are completely disregarded by the Judge? What if the child shows no sign of friends ever visiting that parents home, that they are not allowed to talk about what goes on in that home, that they are unable to call friends or meet with them outside of school? Is that not a sign of a bigger issue? What if they are told that they can't not participate in sports or other events because they have to see the other parent? Is that not a form of control?

Behind closed doors the truth is buried and when they realize their mistake it gets buried deeper until they Child protection workers like the vulture/abusive parent start to believe their own fabrications.

The fact is everyday in the United States and other countries children are taken away from their parents or not being kept safe because a standardized test, that the testers, Child protection workers and the Judge who ordered them would show at least multiple pathology's on or be deemed abnormal if they took it - is being used and reasoned as a tool to say they will do harm in the future; or sadly to ignore the facts the real undisputed facts and say a child and eyewitness's are lying. Or that the child's disclosure against the innocent parent while living with the abusive parent is true without any facts to support it; unless they obtain the real facts found in therapists records never checked that show the child never said any of the things relayed to the Court, because the therapist started to believe one parent or favor one parent over another and disregarded their daily notes that documented what the child really said. Notes that the Courts and DCYF workers seek to surpress.

Oscar Wilder once said: "In all matter's of opinion, our adversaries are insane"

Children's worst adversaries are the Child Protection Service Worker, uneducated Guardian's acting on their behalf and Judges ALL purporting to be acting for the greater good; when children become wards of the State their Warden is the State as their guardian, subjecting them to unspeakable conscience shocking realities, being drugged, put in homes with no where to go when they turn 18, without resources, without direction and all because up to the age of 18, the State received Federal Funding up to 75% to employ the CPSW, GAL and Judge who took them away from their natural families and it needs to be stopped; because the child who needed help is not getting it and living in waste.

“We must always think about things, and we must think about things as they are, not as they are said to be.” George Bernard Shaw

Looking at things as they are, if the government practice is right and just for these children why do we need laws to reinstate parental rights? http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/22/title22sec4059.html 

Push your legislators to adopt open courts for accountability and laws such as Maine's to correct the injustices that are occurring around the United States and your very neighborhood now. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml 

For more information see the Citizens Commission on Human Rights report http://www.cchr.org/ it is not good.

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. C. S. Lewis

Due Process Clause / Bar Association Monopoly

QUESTION PRESENTED
Does the Due Process Clause of the New Hampshire Constitution (Part 1, Articles 2 and 15) require the appointment of counsel for an indigent parent-defendant from whom the State seeks to take custody of a minor child based on allegations of neglect or abuse?1.

This brief brought forward by the NEW HAMPSHIRE Bar Association (ABA) cover’s the vast amount of problems of Judicial Oppression against parents in NEW HAMPSHIRE (N.H.). It is one of the few briefs reviewed that is worth a full read amicus-brief.pdf.

In short, it covers the rights of individuals to Equal Access to Justice; something of which is currently being denied to litigants across the board by the N.H. Court system. and other court systems in the United States.  Furthermore, it fully describes the margin of error in not only abuse and neglect proceedings but in Child Custody proceedings in general; indicating that the risk of error inherent in the truth finding process is NOT the rare exception that the State would like the public to believe; Judges are NOT infallible, Social Workers certainly do not have that inner sense of what is right or wrong in their conduct or motives, that thing that impels one toward right action: action that dictates their conscience .

Furthermore, the ABA points out that even when the State did give counsel to indigent parent’s they were given incompetent Counsel as supported on page 7; the N.H. ABA in 2008 conducted a survey among the more than 8000 attorney’s in the State at the time for Court Improvement; the results show that this area of the law rank in the top 4 of legal areas that required high priority training topics.

Why was it ranked so high?

Speculation of the group consensus would have to included the facts: most attorney’s want to win for their client’s interests; closed door proceedings without access to case work of previous hearings gives Attorney’s no insight to the arsenal used against parents by the State; of further alarm in the State of N.H. is that this Bar Association requires all Attorney’s to be a member of the Bar at a minimal cost of $470.00 a year; not counting the fact that they have to take 12 hours of continuing legal education (CLE) a year at a minimal cost of $199.00 up per 6 credits depending on the content of the CLE. With this in mind you would think that the Bar would enhance their services by providing CLE’s that follow survey needs.

How many training course's in the Child Protection Act has the N.H. Bar conducted since the 2008 survey,directly relating to the needs of their clients, in this top 4 rated area of the law? NONE see NH Bar Catalog

What the brief does not describe and what trainings or lack of on the N.H. ABA site show, is that while they researched and documented the right to push and enforce people’s rights; the N.H. Bar has had NO substantial trainings to offset the closed door proceedings they advocate are in the best interests of the child.  Indicating that the ABA while requiring ALL Attorney’s to be a member to practice law; does not provide attorneys in these cases with the resources to be successful in this area of law, making it a monopoly; non unlike AT&T. 

This is a serious problem if the Bar Association's cannot and/or will not fully address the needs of the people/attorney's using their services should they be allowed to continue as a monopoly?

In the first instance the initial question was reviewed and decided without dissent by the House in 2006; affirming that legal counsel is a matter of right, at public expense to low income persons whose basic human needs are at stake. In America, States can only enhance not detract from the Federal Governments rights to the people. It is clear in reading this brief that, that is exactly what NEW HAMPSHIRE has and continues to do; with a Bar Association made up of Lawyers and Judges withour accountability; to the public they serve.

1.Consistent with the position set out in the parents' brief, the ABA addresses the question solely under New Hampshire law. See Brief of Larry M. and Sonia M. (Natural Parents of Christian M. and Alexander M.) (November 18, 2011) at 1 n. 1 ("Because the due process requirements of the State Constitution are at least as protective of individual liberties as those requirements of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, consideration of the latter is not necessary"). See also In re Father, 155 N.H. 93, 95 (2007) ("We first address this issue under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only."); In re Shelby R., 148 N.H. 237,239 (2002); In re Tracy M, 137 N.H. 119, 122 (1993). amicus-brief.pdf

TACTIC'S IMPOSED ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS IN N.H.

There are several media sources that covered the results of N.H. HB 1608 a bill that proposed weakening an already disturbingly weak "police" response to the protection of Domestic Violence Victims:

TACTICS DIMINISHING

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS RIGHT’S IN THE LEGISLATIVE ARENA

WMUR - Basic coverage

http://www.wmur.com/news/30295720/detail.html

Boston - Meaningful coverage by the Associated Press "Norma Love"

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2012/01/25/father_of_slain_nh_woman_to_testify_on_nh_bill/

The Frisky review by "Jessica Wakeman" is Snark at its best.

http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-01-27/new-hampshire-considering-reversal-of-domestic-violence-laws/

To check the status and changes to this bill see: http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/507561

Part of this Bill had language that indicated that if the officer had not witnessed the crime, it would require police to get a warrant before arresting someone on a domestic violence charge and consequently other crimes. The question to State Rep. Reilly of Grafton N.H. is: "Really, how many times are police, anywhere in this world, present for the crimes that occur?" It appears he is not answering questions and did not show up to hearings at the state house, on the matter he placed before the committee.

COURT ROOM TACTICS

UTILIZED BY ABUSERS TO CONTROL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS

The domestic violence batter wants control; and that control can take many forms; from physical sometimes apparent beatings to demoralizing verbal abuse and threats. Another form is this: once the victim takes measures to end the abuse and get a divorce the abuser than takes their spouse to court on frivolous charges repetitively, to gain custody of the child(ren) which gives the batter further control over his victim that he feels he lost when she left him.

The abuser at this point, then focuses his negative attention toward the Child(ren) and uses them to intentionally interfere with the custodial time of the victim, it starts slowly but progressively by not bringing children back on time, not paying child support, making false allegations against the victim; so much so, that the victim can hardly keep up with watching her back, trying to work, be a mother and move forward - due to the numerous charges levied against them; because division of assets is typically frozen at this stage and the abuser has control of the money, it leaves victims without the resources to combat the negative campaign levied against them.

The results of reviewing many cases in the N.H. system, show that an abuser can and does intentionally interfere in the parent/child relationship as a form of controlling his victim, by gaining custody of them.

N.H. RSA 461:A, supports continuing contact and shared responsibilities between Mothers and Fathers in a divorce. I think everyone can agree that every child desires to know the source of his being, to be connected to that source, and will go to great lengths to maintain that connection.  Children always seek the care, compassion and nurture of their parents, and feel a great loss when that connection is hindered or broken.

When the contact between a parent and child is threatened, the following government study gives us an important clue as to the children's often sudden resistance to spending time with the victim when the victim is a woman:

A study completed by the Office on Child Abuse and Neglect, US Children’s Bureau (2006), and (ironically) titled “The Importance of Fathers in the Healthy Development of Children”

 
2.1 The Impact of the Mother-Father Relationship on Child Outcomes
One of the most important influences a father can have on his child is indirect—fathers influence their children in large part through the quality of their relationship with the mother of their children. A father who has a good relationship with the mother of their children is more likely to be involved and to spend time with their children and to have children who are psychologically and emotionally healthier. ... One of the most important benefits of a positive relationship between mother and father, ... Fathers who treat the mothers of their children with respect and deal with conflict within the relationship in an adult and appropriate manner are more likely to have boys who understand how they are to treat women and who are less likely to act in an aggressive fashion toward females. Girls with involved, respectful fathers see how they should expect men to treat them and are less likely to become involved in violent or unhealthy relationships. In contrast, research has shown that husbands who display anger, show contempt for, or who stonewall their wives (i.e., "the silent treatment") are more likely to have children who are anxious, withdrawn, or antisocial. ⁸

The abuser would have everyone believe that the child (ren) have become this way of his/her own "free will" that it is the Child's choice to treat their mother in a dismissive or resistant manner. The Reality is, the child has been immersed in the father's actions, behaviors, and choices regarding their mother, and has likely internalized these negative messages to reflect his/her father, possibly for emotional safety.

Children take their cues about how they "should" act, think or feel from the people who have the greatest influence in their lives; as such, if the Father demonstrated his ability to view visits with the Mother positively, the child's behavior would reflect that and vice versa.

Instead, it is at this point that the Child’s behavior is suggestive of fear, threatening and intimidation.  Just as children can be unduly influenced by negative attitudes and beliefs, they are even quicker to internalize such messages if they are also exposed to negative consequences for desiring something contrary to the "undue influencer's" wishes. Taking away special toys, cherished pets or reminders of happy times are all ways in which children can be coerced, and are methods that the abuser will engage in with the purpose of gaining the child's cooperation in resisting connection with the victim of these acts.  For more information on persuasion see: https://webspace.utexas.edu/emc597/persuasion.html .

We know children wish to be connected to the estranged parent when they express loss over the belief that the estranged parent "gave up custody" of him/her.  If the child did not care whether or not he/she saw the target parent, the idea that the target parent so readily gave up custody of him - as has been communicated to them by some unknown party - would be of little consequence to them.   to see more click yes here

Child Protective System Part 2 - Video - WLKY Louisville