What is the DSM?

“Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the United States and contains a listing of diagnostic criteria for every psychiatric disorder recognized by the U.S. healthcare system. The current edition, DSM-IV-TR, is used by professionals in a wide array of contexts, including psychiatrists and other physicians, psychologists, social workers, nurses, occupational and rehabilitation therapists, and counselors, as well as by clinicians and researchers of many different orientations (e.g., biological, psychodynamic, cognitive, behavioral, interpersonal, family/systems). It is used in both clinical settings (inpatient, outpatient, partial hospital, consultation-liaison, clinic, private practice, and primary care) as well as with community populations. In addition to supplying detailed descriptions of diagnostic criteria, DSM is also a necessary tool for collecting and communicating accurate public health statistics about the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders.”

This morning there was an article titled “Mental health professionals getting update on definitions” by Gary Rotstein from the Post-Gazette in Pittsburgh.  This article misinterpreted a fact about parental alienation and the DSM. Mr. Rotstein  wrote  “There was consideration of hoarding this time as a mental health issue, but it failed to make it into the recommendations for full manual treatment. There are always lobbyists for parental alienation syndrome, but they did not win out this time either.”

According to the DSM website, Parental Alienation is still being considered as an addition to the DSM. There are many advocates and professionals that are exerting countless hours in establishing research that validates Parental Alienation would be a worthy addition to the DSM. It is believed that if Parental Alienation is entered into the DSM that it would be considered monumental in recognizing that parental alienation exists. There are numerous amounts of professionals in the mental health and judicial community that do not endorse parental alienation as a valid diagnosis. Parental Alienation is still a very controversial topic with professionals and the general public. It only hurts the efforts when there inaccurate reports to dismay the general masses who are in favor of the inclusion of Parental Alienation.

What can you do to help?

Dr. William Bernet is leading the effort to include Parental Alienation into the newest addition of the DSM-5, which is expected to be released in May 2013. Many parents and adult survivors have assisted in this effort by writing the leadership of the DSM and making them aware of the severity of Parental Alienation.

Any person who wishes to express his or her opinion about the inclusion of parental alienation in DSM-V may want to contact the following individuals:

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

The mixed emotions will spread gossip across the media outlets and destroy a family but most important a child and their future. Sarah has the right to be a grandparent but most importantly Johnston has the right to be a father.  This is becoming a common story that is neglected in the eyes of many professionals and family units across the nation.  There is a public spotlight on Sarah Palin that can destroy her political career; one can only hope for the child’s sake that this is resolved in a Collaborative Law setting.

Sarah Palin Accused of Alienating Grandson

Posted by Lisa in Child Custody with the tags , celebrities, custody, single dad on November 2, 2009

Former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin could be heading into an ugly court battle. Levi Johnston, father of Palin’s grandson is threatening with legal steps to allow him access to his son Tripp. The 19-year old may have made not so helpful headlines as the date of Bristol an almost son-in-law of the Palins, but a public legal fight may be even less desirable for Sarah Palin, especially if Johnston can provide evidence supporting his alienation allegations.

Johnston and the Palins have been in a heated debate over the access to Tripp and Johnston now claims that the situation is bad enough that a court battle cannot be avoided. In a recent interview he stated that Sarah Palin is preventing him from seeing his child: “I’m up to the point where I can’t see my kid again. I’m done. I’m sure we’ll end up in court. We’re definitely going to court,” he said.

He recently started paying child support, but his calls asking for the child are not being returned, Johnston claims. Palin, on the other side, says that Johnston is lying. Her lawyer stated that Johnston is always welcome to see Tripp. At this point, it seems too early to judge who is playing what game,  whether Palin in fact is preventing Johnston to see his child and whether she is engaging in alienation, which is a serious charge that can have a major impact on child custody.

Legally, grandparents are considered “significant others” in child custody cases and while courts generally tend to grant grandparents access to their grandchildren, there can also be the question whether grandparents have an adverse influence, intended or not, on a child. The Palin’s situation is an interesting one, as 18-year-old daughter Bristol – as far as we know – still lives at home and a much closer relationship between the child and the grandparents is a given.

Often, such grandparent cases try to paint a “poisonous” relationship to a child. However, in this case, the custody evaluation may focus on determining whether the grandparents are overly attached and become too controlling, which seems what Johnston is indicating: “Bristol listens to her mom. Sarah says something, Bristol is going to follow,” he told The Guardian.

Most states usually try to figure out a way that a parent remains the primary care giver and that both parents take precedence over the grandparents as far asparenting time is concerned. Many psychologists go a step further and suggest that grandparents should only step in if asked: Controlling grandparents can shake the parenting confidence of their children and create unnecessary tension. Typically, grandparents are expected to leave as much parenting responsibility to the biological parents as possible.

If we look at the current case and the fact that Sarah Palin and her lawyer do most of the talking in this case, it seems that that Johnston has at least a foundation to launch his claims from.

It will be interesting to see how the Johnston-vs.-Palin case will work out, if Sarah Palin in fact will be risking a court battle that may interfere with a presidential campaign in 2012.

http://www.singleparentgossip.com/986/child-custody/sarah-palin-accused-of-alienating-grandson/

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Men and women come home to find the children they think about everyday will not be able to be embraced. In some cases they come home to a court order for support or no knowledge of where their children are. The NY Times as well as many other media resources released a story of a mother gaining visitation through the court system. The result in this case was a victory for the mother. We should not forget the fathers that come home to the same result and have no victory or media coverage.

Our soldiers come home from one war to fight another on the home front. We should grieve for the fathers and mothers who come home to fight in court for their children. I thank all the soldiers for their years of service and dedication to our country.

Family Court Gives Soldier Visitation in Custody Case

PATERSON, N.J. — After 10 months in Iraq and three months fighting with her former companion over access to their daughter, a National Guard specialist was granted daily visitation and weekly sleepovers with the 2-year-old girl by a judge in family court here on Tuesday.

Juan Arredondo for The New York Times

Leydi Mendoza, left, at a National Guard Armory family event in Teaneck, N.J.

Ms. Mendoza’s daughter, Elizabeth, who was a year old when her mother was deployed.

The specialist, Leydi Mendoza, 22, said after the hearing that she was delighted by the judge’s temporary order and already knew how she would spend the time with her daughter, Elizabeth. “I’m going to eat with her,” Specialist Mendoza said, laughing, “and finally potty-train her.”

Elizabeth’s father, Daniel Llares, who had prevented Specialist Mendoza from spending more than a few hours with their child for fear of disrupting her routine, said through his lawyer that he was satisfied with the ruling. After several hours of negotiations among the parents, their lawyers and a mediator failed to resolve the standoff, a Passaic County Family Court judge, George F. Rohde Jr., approved a temporary agreement that would allow Mr. Llares to retain residential custody of Elizabeth but grant Specialist Mendoza the right to see the girl every day and take her home on weekends.

“This has never been about keeping the baby from her mother,” said the father’s lawyer, Amy Lefkowitz. “It’s about making a transition that will be appropriate for a child of this age.”

Despite her relief at having won more generous access to her daughter, Specialist Mendoza and her lawyer, Ed Concepcion, said she would still press for full custody.

“This is about the bond between a mother and her child,” Mr. Concepcion said.

The Pentagon does not keep statistics on custody disputes, but military family counselors said they knew of at least five recent cases around the country similar to the struggle over Elizabeth, in which a mother who served overseas is fighting for more access to her child. Congressional leaders are negotiating over legislation to strengthen custody rights of service men and women who are deployed overseas; similar bills passed the House and Senate and must be reconciled.

Some advocates say an unspoken bias against mothers who leave their young children for overseas duty has heightened both legal barriers and social stigma when these women try to resume their role as active parents.

After Elizabeth was born in June 2007, Specialist Mendoza and Mr. Llares lived with the baby at his parents’ home in Wayne, N.J. When it became clear that Specialist Mendoza would be sent overseas, she agonized over whether to leave her daughter, and she and Mr. Llares ultimately agreed to a written military family care plan that granted him temporary custody while she was gone.

“I wanted Elizabeth to grow up and be proud that her mother had served her country,” Specialist Mendoza, who is attending Montclair State University in Montclair, N.J., said before Tuesday’s decision. “And we needed the health care and the military benefits and the help paying for my school.”

Specialist Mendoza, whose family lives out of state, said she ended her relationship with Mr. Llares before she and other members of the 3rd Battalion of the 112th Field Artillery unit left for Texas in July 2008, bound for Iraq. Despite the breakup, the couple agreed that she would help Mr. Llares and his parents pay for Elizabeth’s needs while overseas and assume joint custody once she returned home, Specialist Mendoza said.

But when she returned from the war, things quickly fell apart. The first time Elizabeth was reunited with her mother, both the child and Specialist Mendoza burst into tears.

Mr. Llares, also 22, severely restricted Specialist Mendoza’s visits with Elizabeth because he was concerned that the abrupt change would frighten and confuse the child, his lawyer said.

“He’s very grateful for her service to our country,” said his lawyer, Ms. Lefkowitz. “He just wants to do what’s in the best interest of their daughter.”

 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/02/nyregion/02guard.html

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

You are not alone

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Moms of Michigan Providing an outreach for Non Custodial Mothers in Michigan

Moms of Michigan is dedicated to helping mothers without custody, step mothers and grandmothers. We pledge to continue to support and educate mothers without custody and the general public to bring awareness about these circumstances that break the bonds between a child and their mother.

We are much more than a support system but also a dedicated community of mothers who are seeking reform in our judicial system. We are coming together to enlighten medical professionals, attorneys, CPS, family court systems, and the education system about the factors surrounding non custodial parents.

Moms of Michigan is affiliated with The National Association of Non-Custodial Moms, Inc. (NANCM) Here is your quote from Celeste Chappell-Bates, Executive Vice President/Chief Operating Officer of the National Association of Noncustodial Mothers, Inc. (NANCM). :-)
 
“While there has been a relatively recent (and rightful) equalization in custody determination, there are too few capable support systems in place to help women adjust to their resulting less-active parenting role, or help them weather the stigma that current society places on noncustodial mothers. Noncustodial mothers are not always the monsters, drug addicts, or uncaring parents that most people immediately assume they are; they are still fit and loving regardless of their noncustodial status.
 
Hopefully the Michigan Mothers that find this website find friendships and camaraderie with other noncustodial mothers find resources to help them learn that that they are NOT alone, and help them find peace with their noncustodial status.
 
NANCM is happy to be affiliated with Moms of Michigan and is excited about this website debut!” 
                                                                        ###

For more information on Moms of Michigan or to schedule an interview with Christina Chrzanowski , please call 989-569-3143 or email info@momsofmichigan.org

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Can those phone calls and letters to our state and federal leaders make a difference? The hard work paid off in Texas.

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news151.htm

SWEET VICTORY: TEXAS GOVERNOR VETOES

“TAKE AWAY YOUR CHILD ACT”

By Sarah Foster
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
June 24, 2009
© 2009 NewsWithViews.com

AUSTIN – In a move that has parents and children’s rights advocates cheering, Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Friday vetoed

Senate Bill 1440, a contentious measure designed to make it easier for the state Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) to remove children forcibly from their homes for interrogation and examination during investigations of alleged child abuse or neglect.

In his veto statement the governor said the bill “overreaches and may not give due consideration to the Fourth Amendment rights of a parent or guardian.”

The governor’s action was the result of an intense veto campaign spearheaded by the Parent Guidance Center, an Austin-based grassroots organization that helps low- and middle-income families caught in the snares of the state’s child welfare and protection systems.

Launched by PGC co-founders Johana Scot and her sister Judy Powell as soon as the bill was passed on May 30, the three-week campaign mobilized an opposition that cut across political lines, generating 17,373 letters and phone calls to the governor’s office from concerned Texans and their sympathizers across the country, according to spokeswoman Allison Castle.

That count does not include the thousands of messages sent to state lawmakers who had voted for the bill in the first place, asking them to contact the governor and urge a veto.

There were 455 messages in support of the measure, requesting the governor to sign.

“A Collective Sigh of Relief”

Among those urging a veto was Republican Rep. Jerry Madden, who had sponsored SB 1440 in the House after it passed the Senate. In the final days of the legislative session Madden agreed to attach another bill – SB 1064 – as an amendment to SB 1440 a non-controversial, unopposed measure that had been placed on the Local and Consent calendar for automatic passage.

SB 1064 was one of dozens of measures that died on the calendar when time for debate ran out. Madden was assured by Democratic Rep. Patrick Rose, chairman of the House Human Services Committee, that like SB 1440 the bill was non-controversial and unopposed.

A written statement of opposition submitted by Judy Powell – communications director for PCG — had disappeared.

When Madden later learned that SB 1064 was anything but non-controversial, was not unopposed, and radically changed SB 1440, he e-mailed Tim Lambert – president of the Texas Home School Coalition – apologizing for his role in the fiasco:

“I would not have taken[n] any amendment to SB 1440 if I thought it in any way endangered the original contents of the bill,” Madden wrote. “We did not catch the fact the bill had changed significantly from the Senate passed version and that is our fault. As always I appreciate you and your work and expect the bill to be vetoed.”

Madden followed his e-mail to Lambert with a letter to the governor urging a veto.

Disappointed supporters – which included news reporters – insist the bill was intended merely to “clarify” rules on court hearings and criteria DFPS agents must meet to enter a house, remove a child, or review a child’s medical records, and that it didn’t grant the CPS additional authority.

“In simple terms, [SB 1440] clarifies the process for DFPS to obtain a court order that can aid in investigation of child abuse and neglect,” said Tina Amberboy, executive director for the Supreme Court Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth and Families – as reported by The Facts, a Brazoria County newspaper.

“The current statute allows DFPS to obtain an order, but the statute is vague with regard to how an investigator actually goes about getting the order,” she said.

Two Court Rulings

The first case involved the infamous DFPS raid on the West Texas ranch owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) and the seizing of over 400 children. The Texas Supreme Court ruled that the “removal of the children was not warranted,” and upheld a lower court decision that the department had violated various state laws and not made “reasonable efforts to eliminate or prevent the removal of the … children.”

The second was that of Gary and Melissa Gates, whose 13 children had been removed from their home by CPS without a court hearing or probable cause. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the law “was not clearly established” and should be clarified – particularly with reference to the Fourth Amendment protections — and that’s what it did. The Court concluded:

“… now that we have clearly established the law in this area, we expect that TDPRS, law enforcement agencies, and their agents and employees will abide by these constitutional rules and seek to involve the courts, who act as neutral magistrates in these complicated matters, as early in the process as is practicable.”

[NOTE: Texas Dept. of Protective Regulatory Services (TDPRS) was the name of the Dept. of Family and Protective Services when the Gates case began.]

Responding to the rulings, DFPS made significant changes in procedures. A legal advisory memo – sent out to the staff shortly after the Gates’ decision was handed down — shows that DFPS officials understood perfectly what they had to do (and could no longer do) and did not think the ruling was vague or needed clarification.

The decision “sets out a new standard that will require DFPS to obtain a court order prior to removal in a much larger proportion of our cases and affects whether we can transport or enter a home” and also “clarifies” that if this standard is not followed, staffers could be sued as individuals and lose qualified immunity.

DFPS’ Remarkable Job

That was just the beginning. A year later, in her call for a veto posted on the PCG website, Johana Scot noted approvingly:

“The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) in turn did a remarkable job after these rulings by changing, adjusting, re-educating, and clarifying their Policies and Procedures Hand-Book and employees knowledge so that these rulings would be upheld and their work in investigations and with families could be improved. DFPS was on the right track and they were getting the message!”

SB 1440 — would have placed “all that work in jeopardy as well as the efforts by DFPS to rectify how they are supposed to protect children and help families,” she wrote.

Gov. Perry chose to veto SB 1440 so that was stopped – but in his veto message he said he’d be directing DFPS though its parental advisory committee, “To develop and recommend statewide procedures to follow when seeking court orders to aid investigations, while protecting the rights of parents and families” – which is already being done.

A Smigen of Victory

Commenting on the veto Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, called it “Very good news for Texas children” – because it’s the children who are most hurt by CPS policies that forcibly remove them from their families and subject them to intrusive questioning and examination.

“The problem with the bill is what it would have done to the Fourth Amendment rights of children,” Wexler writes.

“But there are limits to this victory. I said in a previous post that the bill effectively reduced the amount of evidence needed for CPS to enter a home from a smidgen to a tenth of a smidgen.

“Now, if we can just increase the standard to, say, two or three smidgens,” he said.

Earlier Story

Sarah Foster: Coalition Asks Texas Governor to Veto “Take Away Your Child Act”: June 18, 2009

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

‘Deprogramming’ alienated children is science fiction

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

He said …She said…

Below is the video posted of the child and her statements about her father.

Today a comment was made by a viewer of the site referring me to the case of Bedwell V Thompson. I have spent the past few hours researching this case that has become a whirlwind of fascination. In the world of parental rights and advocacy I have seen and heard many unusual cases, this case is really not one out of the ordinary.

A video that was edited for time exposes the statements made by the 2 and a half year old daughter. She repeats the same wording over and over. It is horrific in nature and hard to view. But is it evidence or another nasty divorce case with the child as the trophy?

Many of the parents in the system are already aware of the underlining corruption of the family court system but in this case there really isn’t hard core evidence. I have seen mothers and fathers abuse the system to obtain custody. In one interview with Connie Bedwell, she made a statement that she obtained a PPO and that week her daughter starting implying abuse was happening from her father, Dustin Thompson.

The system believes she is making up the allegations, in return Connie says it’s because the system is corrupt and has not followed through on procedures. She also states that her ex’s family has close friendships with the judicial community. I will update this blog with more news when I can obtain valuable evidence. This is a sad day when we are at a loss on what is truth. It is another case of he said… she said. The truth of this case is someone is lying and either way the child loses. Either way injustice is continuing to make headlines.

Is this case the result of an adversarial court system where parents are pushed to the limit to gain custody or something else? In some cases there is abuse and until we know all the facts we can’t judge either way. The final result we all know to be truth is in some way this child has injustice in their life.

This is one of the video’s with a interview with Connie Bedwell

Below you will find a letter from the child’s therapist Mitzi Nay. In this letter it states that the mom is present in ALL 13 sessions.

 Mitzi will also be interviewed on blog talk radio with Sean McAllister on June 13th at 1pm EST.

~ It has been brought to my attention that Ms. Nay was not a guest on the show and their was no plans for her to be on the show. I read the blog incorrectly. Sorry for any confusion and retract the statement.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites