Timeforjusticeandprotectionforthechildren: #2014 Safe Child Act Christmas miracle for the children sentenced to live in the abusers homes in Wisconsin.

https://plus.google.com/+victoriouschildren/posts/ALaCv1iCsjP

Wisconsin lets end the discredited pas theory.

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aB4nP7Ajt_NRqmD_xJFM_FY9Ld5TkgLl9VXME7MfQN4/edit?usp=sharing

I hereby request the immediate implementation of the Safe Child Act in Wisconsin see link
I hereby dedicate this request on behalf of the many families in Wisconsin who lost loved ones and those re victimized by the discredited pas theory use and ALL funding end to all programs derived of pas theory and reversal of all case based on the discredited pas theory testimony
Thank you to all who spread the word and please share the legal on top of all of the pages thank you
#2014 Safe Child Act Christmas miracle for the children sentenced to live in the abusers homes in Wisconsin.
Source Check

Wiscosnin investigation parental alienation theory

https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/wiscosnin-investigation-parental-alienation-theory

Wis. discredited pas theory Corporation? part 1
https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/wiscosnin-investigation-parental-alienation-theory/wisdiscreditedpastheorycorporationpart1

Wis. discredited pas theory Corporation? part 2
https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/wiscosnin-investigation-parental-alienation-theory/wisdiscreditedpastheorycorporationpart2

Wis. Discredited pas theory Corporation? part 3
https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/wiscosnin-investigation-parental-alienation-theory/wisdiscreditedpastheorycorporationpart3
the legal on parental alienation theory and its movement to normalize sex with children warning
https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/wiscosnin-investigation-parental-alienation-theory/thelegalonparentalalienationtheoryanditsmovementtonormalizesexwithchildrenwarning

1978-2014 - PARENTALALIENATIONINVENTOR
sites.google.com
https://sites.google.com/site/parentalalienationinventor/home/attention-wisconsin-pas-theory/1978-2014

With these provisions the courts can stop sending children to live with dangerous abusers. Instead of pressuring
mothers to cooperate with their abusers they can be using their power and authority to require him to stop his abuse
if he wants to have a relationship with the children. It is important for legislators and court professionals to
understand that children do not need both parents equally. They need the safe parent more than the abusive one
and their primary attachment figure more than their other parent. It is certainly high time the courts start making
decisions that are truly based on what is really in the best interests of the children.
by Barry Goldstein

Excerpt http://timesupblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/safe-child-act.html"Parental Alienation Syndrome is not mentioned by
name, but the law would bar theories like PAS that have no scientific basis. Furthermore professionals who seek to use such bogus
theories would be barred from participating in domestic violence cases. The recent rejection of the campaign to include PAS in the
DSM IV because it has no scientific basis should make it easy for PAS to be rejected including when it is used by other names such
as parental alienation or just alienation,
I hereby request the immediate implementation of the Safe Child Act in Wisconsin see appendix
I hereby dedicate this request on behalf of the many families in Wisconsin who lost loved ones and those re victimized by the discredited pas theory use and ALL funding end to all programs derived of pas theory and reversal of all case based on the discredited pas theory testimony
Thank you to all who spread the word and please share the legal on top of all of the pages thank you
#2014 Safe Child Act Christmas miracle for the children sentenced to live in the abusers homes in Wisconsin.

Appendix
Safe Child Act
by Barry Goldstein
Purpose: Improve the Safety of Children involved in Child Custody Cases
Excerpt http://timesupblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/safe-child-act.html"Parental Alienation Syndrome is not mentioned by
name, but the law would bar theories like PAS that have no scientific basis. Furthermore professionals who seek to use such bogus
theories would be barred from participating in domestic violence cases. The recent rejection of the campaign to include PAS in the
DSM IV because it has no scientific basis should make it easy for PAS to be rejected including when it is used by other names such
as parental alienation or just alienation,

https://plus.google.com/+victoriouschildren/posts/ALaCv1iCsjP

Excerpts see link
Use of Inappropriate Syndrome Testimonyhttp://kspope.com/ethics/malpractice.php
As early as September of 1989 Dr. Gary Melton and Susan Limber in an article entitled "Psychologists' Involvement in Cases of Child Maltreatment" [American Psychologist Vol. 44, No. 9, pp. 1225-1233] commented on the inappropriate use by therapists of syndromes that are not found in the various versions of Diagnosis and Statistical Manual. There have been a proliferation of such syndromes over the last several years. At this point using syndromes which are not appropriately researched or acknowledged by the profession is below the standard of care. Among the syndromes which are controversial and which should not be represented as accepted in the therapist community are Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, Parental Alienation Syndrome, [Wiederholt v. Fischer 169 WIS 2d 524, 45 N.W. 2d 442 (1992)], False Memory Syndrome, and Malicious Mother Syndrome.http://kspope.com/ethics/malpractice.php

The Danger of Pedophilia Preying on America's Innocenthttp://www.truthmagazine.com/archives/volume44/V44020307.htm
Excerpts " Psychiatry and Psychology Experts. Pedophiles looking to find some “expert” to condone their behavior as “normal” will often turn to the institutions of psychiatry and psychology. For example, many pedophiles refer to a 1998 article by the American Psychological Association (APA) claiming that sex between adults and children can actually be positive for “willing” children. The same article proposes that we drop the terms “child abuse,” “molestation,” “victims” and “adult-child sex” when discussing this issue. This article was later modified by the APA, but many pedophiles continue to appeal to it to promote their actions. One psychologist, Dr. Michael Werthmeimer (member of the APA), believes that pedophilia is not harmful to the child. Dr. Richard Gardner, a child psychiatrist at Columbia University, believes that all forms of deviant sexual behavior should be acceptable, including adult-child sex, sex with the dead, sex with animals, and even sex with defecation. Of course, pedophiles make it a point to interview and quote from “experts” like Werthmeimer and Gardner.11"http://www.truthmagazine.com/archives/volume44/V44020307.htm

Reisman, J. (April 20, 1999). Child Custody for Sex Offenders. Worldnet Daily.http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=16109
EXCERPT: Inevitably, Gardner 's sole experimental authority for this PAS theory is Alfred C. Kinsey. In fact, Gardner largely plagiarizes Chapters 5 in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Female (1953) to show child molestation is normal.

Child custody for sex offenders

www.wnd.com

A Free Press For A Free People Since 1997

http://www.thelizlibrary.org/supervised-visitation/supervised-visitation-stupidity.html

Endless Stupidity -- Advocacy for Supervised Visitation Centers

www.thelizlibrary.org

supervised visitation centers, parenting coordination, bad custody evaluation, custody evaluations, Laura Hohnecker, Martha Jacobson, Juliette Lippman, child custody, parenting...

If the evaluator issues a report based on PAS or even alienation, there is strong research in the Saunders’ study to challenge it. We can start by asking the evaluator if he agrees that sex between adults and children is improper. Then ask if there is any research not based on the belief that sex between adults and children can be appropriate (this is what PAS is based on), that “alienating” behavior creates a safety risk. Are you aware the DOJ study found that PAS, including by any other name has no scientific basis? Are you aware PAS was rejected for inclusion in the DSM-V because it has no scientific basis? Are you aware that the Saunders’ study found that evaluators with inadequate training tended to believe the myth that women frequently make false allegations but alienation theories, particularly those used to separate children from their primary attachment figure are based on a belief that most dv and child abuse allegations by mothers are false? Are you aware that evaluators are starting to lose their licenses for using PAS? Do you know if that is because they are in affect creating a diagnosis that does not exist? You can also ask questions comparing the harm of separating a child from their primary attachment figure with the harm of negative statements about the other parent. Ask for any research findings because there is no scientific support for these standard biased practices.http://timesupblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/department-of-justice-report-demands.html

Excerpts page 395
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/docs/Brown_PAS_impact.pdf
Call to Advocacy
If you are not familiar with families who are involved in PAS cases, you may not believe that these types of egregious acts occur. While listening to the stories of women and children,
I have felt overwhelmed and dumbfounded because the deck seems to be stacked against truth and justice. Ironically, the horrific abuses that occur in the marital relationship are comparable to the systematic oppression that is sanctioned by the state through the family courts after divorce. The legal system and its officers create kangaroo courts in which civil liberties and human rights are arbitrarily violated (Waller, Waller, & Shin, 2001).
There is no oversight and accountability for judges, lawyers, and mental health professionals who collude with the batterers and abusers. The need for a nationwide policy that bans PAS from family courts is long overdue. In
2006, the National Organization of Women moved toward this goal by denouncing PAS and resolving that any professional whose mission involves the protection of the rights of women and children denounce its use as unethical, unconstitutional, and dangerous. Social workers and other social justice advocates who are compelled to take action should, therefore,
educate themselves about the perils of PAS and validate the experiences of, and create safe spaces, for victims of this oppression to speak their truth. Furthermore, there must be a concerted effort to challenge the agents of the family courts and mental health professionals to stop perpetuating the abuse and violence against women and children. This is a call for advocacy and social change. Silence by social workers and other change agents maintains the status quo and emboldens the proponents of PAS. The abuse demonstrated in
the Baldwin–Basinger case only scratches the surface of what happens in the lives of families of all ethnic and socioeconomic levels across the United States. Outcry, critique, and debate must be linked to accountability, empowerment, and action to achieve social justice.
To be clear, PAS is not a legitimate diagnosis and should not be admitted into the courts. Overwhelmingly, it is used against mothers to raise suspicions of their psychosis and unfitness as parents. Users of this strategy do not seek custody for the safety and welfare of children. Instead, their sole mission is to create a legal shield of protection and silence and an unobstructed pathway to continue their abuses of power. When PAS is used as a legal strategy
in divorce cases, families are negatively affected; the women are demonized, and the children are at a grave risk of further abuse. http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/docs/Brown_PAS_impact.pdf

www.leadershipcouncil.org

Conclusion

At best, PAS is a nondiagnostic “syndrome” that only explains the behavior of the child and the mother when there is a known false allegation.20 It is a courtroom diagnosis befitting adversaries involved in legal sparring. It is not capable of lending itself to hard data or inclusion in the forthcoming DSM-V.

In short, PAS is an untested theory that, unchallenged, can have far-reaching consequences for children seeking protection and legal vindication in courts of law.

Prosecutors and other child abuse professionals should educate themselves, their colleagues and clients when confronting PAS in the legal realm. Part 2 of this newsletter will address the case law on this subject. For more in-depth and comprehensive treatment of these issues, contact the National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse.http://www.ndaa.org/ncpca_update_v16_no6.html

Update Newsletter Volume 16, Number 6

www.ndaa.org

The late Dr. Richard Gardner, a clinical professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University, coined Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) in 1985, after noticing a “disorder” among patients within his private practice. The “disorder” involves one parent...

Excerpts "Many women have testified under oath regarding the forced removal of their children based on the scientifically inept theory of Parental Alienation Syndrome promulgated by Kinseyan-adherent Richard Gardner and his disciples. This suggests that few judges have read the following excerpt from the report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence."http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/08/implications_of.html

Judith Gelernter Reisman, Ph.D. - Laws: Implications of the Kinsey Reports on Child Custody Cases

www.drjudithreisman.com

The quality and health of a society is measured by the treatment of its most vulnerable populations: its women and children. 1 Many facts support the conclusion that we are living in an increasingly violent era. For example, current data on violent crimes, suicides, out of...

Conclusions

In spite of its many shortcomings, many courts have accepted PAS because it apparently appears to explain a well-recognized phenomenon within custody battles - the often acrimonious fight between parents for their child's affection. However, Daubert demands that scientists conduct competent science before becoming paid experts. Gardner 's PAS theory and his various scales to differentiate true and false claims of child sexual abuse are not informed by science and have been discredited by his peers. Rather than subjecting his theories to scientific review, most of Gardner 's writings are published through his own press or in nonscientific journals. Because Gardner 's theories are based on his clinical observations and not on scientific data, they must be understood in the context of his atypical views concerning pedophilia and child sexual abuse.

Gardner 's theories are based on his assumption that sex between a child and an adult is not inherently harmful, and his belief that there is an epidemic of false sexual abuse allegations being made by vengeful wives during custody disputes. Gardner maintains these beliefs in spite of a wealth of clinical and experimental data which prove otherwise. This is not to imply that such allegations are always accurate, or that parents do not attempt to manipulate their children during adversarial custody litigation. However, Gardner 's theories are not sufficiently scientific to be able to make cause and effect determinations, are biased against women and children, and are flawed by their failure to take into account alternative explanations for the behavior of the parties involved.

Frustration over bitter custody battles should not tempt the legal system to blindly accept unproven theories such as PAS. Reliance on such simplified approaches to the complex problem of alleged abuse in the context of child custody disputes is likely to result in misdiagnosis and a failure to protect children. High conflict divorces take an emotional toll on children, and this toll should not be exacerbated through the use of "junk science" which may wrongly deny children a relationship with the parent who has heretofore been their primary caretaker. In the end, all psychological evidence upon which a child's safety will turn should represent the best that science has to offer, not one man's unsupported opinions and assumptions.http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/3.html