Saturday, February 25, 2012

The hard truth of parental alienation syndrome theory (inappropriate syndrome use)


Defining the Divorce Related FETID FATHERING SYNDROME

Defining the Divorce RelatedFETID FATHERING SYNDROME By liz, B.S., J.D., LL.M., D.B.A., P.T.A., Ph.T., N.N.F.L.P., and MoM.E The URL for this page is http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/fuf.html 
A parody of Ira Turkat's Malicious Mother Syndrome.   Uhm...  wait...  no! ...
HIS article was the parody! 
(How'd he do that before I wrote this...?)
With the increasing commonality of divorce involving children, a pattern of abnormal behavior has emerged that has received little attention. The present paper defines the Divorce Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome. Specific nosologic criteria are provided with abundant clinical examples. Given there is no lack of empirical data available on the disorder, issues of classification, etiology, treatment, and prevention appear overripe for investigation. I.e., it's about damn time. 
INTRODUCTION 
A divorced woman gains custody of her children and her ex-husband vents his love and concern by shooting all of them. 
A man in a custody battle has sex with his offspring because his divorcing wife finds him repugnant. 
A father forces his children to sleep in a car while he downs a few in a bar on their way home. 
The actions illustrate a pattern of increasingly common behavior that has emerged as the divorce rate involving children has grown. Today, half of all marriages will end in divorce (Beal and Hochman, 1991). The number of children involved in divorce has grown dramatically (e.g., Hetherington and Arastah, 1988) as well. While the majority of such cases are "settled" from a legal perspective, outside the courtroom he continues to abuse and control, frequently rationalizing his behavior as merely divorce-related "battle." 
The media have spent considerable effort raising public awareness about the problem posed for divorced mothers who do not receive court-ordered child support payments. Hodges (1991) has noted that less than 20 percent of divorced mothers receive all child support payments three years after their divorce. Research on the decline of women's economic status following divorce (e.g., Hernandez, 1988; Laosa, 1988) has contributed legislation of not much use in addressing the "Deadbeat Dad" problem, but has encouraged a backlashing trend of misogynistic propaganda and specious "research," in the ostensible interests of "presenting two sides of an issue" which never had a whole lot to offer on the wrong side in the first place. 
While the media correctly portray the difficulties imposed upon women and children by the "Deadbeat Dad" phenomenon, the cameras have yet to honestly capture the warfare waged by a select group of fathers against child supporting, nurturing mothers. Everyday, attorneys and therapists downplay the many horror stories in which vicious behaviors are lodged against innocent mothers and children. Unfortunately, while there is considerable empirical data on the subject, researcher's agenda'd writeups and the scholarly literature have pretty much ignored the problems. 
By contrast, the drivel prattering on and on and on in an effort to bolster Fetid Fatherings is reaching absurd proportion. A noted example can be found in the writings of Gardner(1987, 1989) who has concocted a marvel of propaganda called the Parental Alienation Syndrome. Supposedly, a custodial parent successfully engages in a variety of maneuvers to alienate the child from the non-residential parent. Once successfully manipulated, the child becomes "...preoccupied with deprecation and criticism of a parent-denigration that is unjustified and/or exaggerated" (Gardner, 1989 p. 226). In the typical case of Parental Alienation Syndrome, both mother and child supposedly engage in an array of actions against the father. Gardner views "brainwashing" as a concept "too narrow" (Gardner, 1989) to capture the psychological manipulation involved in turning a child against his/her non-residential parent. Of course, the entire theory is pure shit, but then again, so was Freud's theory of penis-envy, and a whole lotta other things people like to think are true. 
While Gardner's fetid anti-woman descriptions of "Parental Alienation Syndrome" provide a major contribution to obfuscating the realities of men's child-involved hostilities, the present paper is concerned with a more global abomination. As noted in the examples provided in the beginning of this manuscript, lethal attacks on divorcing mothers take place which are beyond merely manipulating the children. Further, these actions include a willingness by some fathers to violate societal law. Finally, there are fathers who persistently engage in fetid behaviors designed to continue to allow them to exert control over the mothers of their offspring, despite being unable to show any good reason why they should have the right to do so. From yammerings on about the alleged harms of "fatherless" households, to the demanding of a "shared parental responsibility" post-divorce that they never undertook during marriage when she begged them to do so, these men epitomize the reason that for eons, societies have ended up engaging in wars, and atrocities of justice have never been quelched, and the reason that irrational male-mob-mentality, however ostensibly sophisticated, and however ostensibly educated, continues to be the rule of the day.
The purpose of the present paper is to define and illustrate just one aspect of this global abomination with the hope of generating increased honesty in the scientific and clinical investigation of the real problem. 
DEFINITION 
The present section provides a beginning definition of the Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome, which has been derived from clinical and legal cases. As in all initial proposals, it is anticipated that future research will lead to greater refinement in the taxonomic criteria. 
The proposed definition encompasses four major criteria, as follows: 
1. A man who unjustifiably punishes his divorcing or divorced wife by: a. Attempting to remove the children from their closest attachment b. Involving others in fetid actions against the mother c. Engaging in excessive litigation 
2. The father specifically attempts to "possess" or "access" i.e. control and manipulate what he considers to be his human chattel, i.e. his ex-wife and the children by, among other things, a. Refusing to maintain a regular and consistent visitation schedule, refusing to regularly make payments of child and spousal support, refusing to continue the marital pattern of primary caregiving, etc. b. Attempting to purchase the affections of the children c. Sudden unwarranted and undesired interference with the child(ren)'s school, life, and household routines. 
3. The pattern is pervasive and includes fetid acts towards the mother including: a. Lying to the children b. Lying to others c. Violations of law 
4. The disorder is not specifically due to another mental disorder, although a separate mental disorder may co-exist. And usually does, albeit it's routinely ignored by therapists and the legal system. It's called Patriarchal Psychosis and Sense of Entitlement. 
CLINICAL ILLUSTRATIONS 
In this section, I will provide clinical illustrations for each criterion using the reference numbers provided above. As criteria 1-3 are behavior specific to the Fetid Fathering Syndrome, I will provide a series of clinical examples. The fourth criterion which addresses the relationship of the proposed syndrome to other mental disorders, will be discussed more generally. 
Criterion 1A: Demanding "Rights" to the Children 
The range of actions taken by a father to attempt to remove the children from their mother is impressive. For example: 
One father lied to his children that he could no longer buy food because their mother was getting all of his money via child support, and spending it going to male strip bars, shopping, and having her nails done. 
A doctor's husband forced her 10-year-old son to apply for federally funded free school lunches to delude the boy that it somehow was his successful mother's fault that daddy was an alcoholic ne'er-do-well.
A woman who for years was very close to the children in a custody battle, was asked by their father to give up neutrality and join his campaign against the mother to "dance on her grave." When the friend refused to give up her neutrality, the father falsely informed the children that their mother was a feminist dyke who was having an affair with this woman. 
These behaviors, if successful, could lead a child to not only hate the father, but perhaps go years without seeing him. Of course, the father will immediately claim that the children's reaction is the result of their mother's behavior, backed up by such idiots as IraTurkat. Another example would be Cartwright (1993) who flatulated: "The goal of the alienator is crystalline: to deprive the lost parent, not only of the child's time, but of the time of childhood." (p.210). 
Criterion 1B: Involving Others in Fetid Actions 
The second component of the first major criterion where the father attempts to punish the mother who gave life to his children at huge sacrifice to herself, involves manipulating other individuals to engage in fetid acts against the mother. Examples of this kind are as follows: 
During a custody battle, a father lied to a therapist about the mother's behavior. The therapist, having never spoken with the mother, appeared as an "expert" witness to inform the Judge that the father should be the primary residential parent and that the mother needed to be in therapy. See, e.g. Karen Anderson's case, as well as the case of the child who killed himself after this sort of horsepucky by Gardner. 
One angry father manipulated teenagers to leave anonymous threatening notes at the ex-wife's home. 
A father who did not have legal custody of his children manipulated a secretary at the child's school to assist in kidnapping the child. 
In the above examples, it is important to note that the person manipulated by the angry father has, in a way, been "charmed" into siding against the mother. Typically, the individual "duped" takes on a righteous indignation, contributing to a rewarding climate for the father initiating fetid actions. Commonly "duped" third parties are not only family law professionals, but also second wives, girlfriends, and the mothers of these men.
Criterion 1C: Excessive Litigation 
There is little question that either party in a divorce or custody proceeding is entitled to appropriate legal representation and action. 
Most commonly, however, it is men who have the greater access to litigation funds, as well as community contacts, and interim legal fees and costs are seldom awarded.
Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome, therefore, attempt to punish the divorcing wife by engaging in excessive litigation. 
A belligerent and unreasonable father verbally attacked his ex-wife whenever he saw her, which was often, because he also was engaging in stalking. Over time, her response was to try to avoid him. He then took her repeatedly to court, thereby using the legal system to force her to have contact with him. 
One father told a judge that his daughter was not really his child, demanding a paternity test, and attempting to make the mother appear to be a free-wheeling slut. 
One man refused to stop attacking his ex-wife through the courts, despite numerous attorneys being fired or voluntarily leaving the case. Over a three-year period, seven different attorneys were utilized. 
Data exist which can help in determining the range of excessive litigation. For example, Koel et al. (1988) report on the frequency of post-divorce litigation in a sample of 700 families. Their data indicate that only 12.7% of families file one post-divorce petition to the court, whereas less than 5 percent file two or more petitions (Koel et al. 1988); less than one percent file four or more petitions. 
Criterion 2A: Claiming Visitation Denial 
Experts are in agreement that regular and uninterrupted visitation with the non-residential parent is not harmful for children, albeit little research substantiates that it is of any benefit. (Cf Hodges, 1991). Despite this, however, because of the incessant drumbeat of pro-father propaganda, some states, such as Florida, actually have laws written to reflect the view that such visitation is "crucial" to child well-being. (Cf Keane, 1990). Unfortunately, even when it is recognized that the mother and children also have legal rights to some semblance of stability and normalcy in the post-divorce household, individuals with Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome continue to interfere with it, using, inter alia, usually false claims based on ridiculous exaggerations, that visitation is being denied. 
A father who previously attacked his ex-wife physically during visitation transfers of the children, refused to return the children as required when the ex-wife obtained a court-order that exchanges be monitored by the police. Fathers also counsel each other on tactics to make the mother look like the party at fault, such as claiming a need for police to accompany them to exercise visitation that is not being denied in the first place. 
A common strategy of Fetid Fatherers is to exercise visitation sporadically, frequently failing to show up at all. Then, on an occasion when they do arrive (late), to make a brouhaha the first time when, weary of consoling disappointed children, and tired of having days on end and her own schedule repeatedly ruined by the manipulative pointless waiting, the mother and children decide to pursue other plans. 
One father had his twenty-year-old girlfriend repeatedly pick up the children for visitation, during which times she would make snide comments to the mother, and gleefully inform her that the children would be in her care for the weekend, inasmuch as the father was "working overtime." 
The President of the father's rights group pompously misnomered as Council for Children's Rights (Washington, D.C.) refuses to acknowledge such tactics, let alone that they really are a form of child abuse (Cf Levy, 1992). Unfortunately, the police typically avoid involving themselves in such situations, unless it's to aid the father. Furthermore, even if a victimized mother is financially capable of returning to court on an ongoing basis, there is little that can be done to prevent such fathers' behaviors. Finally, even when such cases are brought to trial, the courts are often inadequate in protecting the custodial family's interests, instead choosing to give lip service to fathers' visitation rights. (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992). 
Given the physical absence of one parent, the telephone plays an important role in maintaining the communications between child and non-residential parent. Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome, however, engage in an array of actions designed to abuse telephone access. 
A father claimed that he called to speak to his children and was told that they were not at home when, in fact, he could hear their voices in the background. In fact, what happened was that this was the father's third call that day, he already had spoken twice at length to the toddlers, the toddlers were napping, and he was interrupting the mother's Brownie Scout meeting. 
One father claimed that when called to speak with his children, the mother put him on "hold," informed no one, and then left him on hold. In reality, this was yet another stalker-type, who had called upward of twenty times already that day to talk to the mother (not the children), and she put the phone down, rather than listen to the incessant ringing. 
Another father even managed to claim that a mother's good intentions were somehow thwarting his "rights." He claimed, when she encouraged the children to call him (after not hearing from him for weeks), that she somehow "knew" that he was away on vacation and did this to "turn the children against him." 
Some fathers claim that "alienation attempts" are so painful and fruitless that this is the reason they eventually stop calling their children; that they simply "give up." In reality, their original calls were for the purpose of stalking and harassing their ex-wife, and when this became of less interest, they moved on to other women. Speaking with their children was never of any but casual passing interest in the first place.  SEE LINK FOR REST OF article: http://www.thelizlibrary.org/site-index/site-index-frame.html#soulhttp://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/pas.htm

No comments:

Post a Comment