Child Abuse and Custody Evaluation

Free Child Custody Newsletter Click Here

Click buttons above for custody websites

Tel 1-800-805-5226

arrow1.gif (923 bytes)Click Here for Custody Attorneys

[ Home | Search ]

horizontal rule

My greatest fear ! somebody tells me that my son has committed suicide.

From: targetparent
Date: 24 Jun 2003
Time: 04:49:07
Remote Name:


My son has been diagnosed with severe Parental Alienation Syndrome and is totally enmeshed. My greatest fear is the telephone ringing and when I pick it up, somebody tells me that my son has committed suicide. I have been keeping tabs on him through a next door neighbor and grade cards, what I've discovered deeply concerns me. He has no friends, he has gone from having an "A" average prior to the divorce to a "D" average now. Please read on to see why he's so sick! Whose hands will be washed in my sonís blood if he becomes a teen suicide statistic? I believe Alameda County, California Superior Court Judge Jacob Blea III bares this responsibility! I believe him to be negligent in his responsibilities as a Family Court Judge, I donít believe he even took the time to review the first evaluation or the over one hundred and fifty page report provided by Dr. Linzer which outlined and explained her diagnosis of Parental Alienation Syndrome.

I assure you sir I will not rest until this case is made public, my sonís well being secured and his rights protected under the Constitution are recognized. This courts sanctioned emotional abuse will surely result in long term injury to both my son and me!

Let me begin by making clear what it is I'm trying to accomplish, and that is to expose those who not only failed to protect my son, but also participated in his abuse. I also thought the public would be interested that the courts placed a value of $600 on my son's life. My question to all of you is what is your childís life worth? The following took place in Alameda County California Family Court.

The divorce began in January 1997; my ex-wife alleged substance abuse and physical abuse. Family Court Services investigated and reported no substance abuse but notes:  Andrew shows a somewhat disturbing connection with Ms Q's feelings about Mr. Q, an the family's separation.  It is not at all clear how much Andrew's thoughts and feeling are being either consciously or unconsciously impacted by Ms. Q's thoughts and feelings. The mediator recommended a full custody evaluation be performed and recommended four psychiatrists to contact to perform it. She also ordered that until the completion of the evaluation only 12 hours a week visitation would be allowed. It took nearly one year for the evaluation to be completed, this due to the evaluator taking numerous vacations, and a space of a month between sessions wasn't unusual. Finally in May 1998, only days before the scheduled hearing the twenty-eight-page report was completed and submitted to all parties. This gave little time to review its contents, however the final recommendations were favorable recommending joint custody, and increased visitation. The evaluator reported that my exwifes allegations of abuse to be false, and backs up my claims that my son was being brainwashed by his mother and family. He notes:  She is hyper vigilant and often projects out her own worries and anger in a somewhat paranoid fashion.  She is now closing ranks with her family and to do that Jim must be cast out as an active and valued participant in her son's life.  As a matter of psychological survival he has also closed ranks with his mother and grandparents and has adopted the same distrustful and is suspicious attitudes.  I also believe that it is important that he be able to regain a relationship with his father to assist in distancing from the enmeshed and one sided, position he has taken.  In effect he has decided that his mother and grandparents are good and his father is bad.  I believe that this type of splitting will inevitably lead to his also having a negative and distorted view of himself. No special attention was given to these observations, so all parties accepted the recommendations and the judge orders joint custody and normalized visitation upon completion of four months of father son therapy. Another comment made by the evaluator was a warning that my ex-wife and her family would attempt to sabotage the ordered therapy, he notes:  There will be a tremendous resistance in this family system to increasing contact with concomitant pressure on the therapists involved. At the beginning of the divorce my son's mother hired a therapist to treat my son, this due to the stress of the divorce or so I thought. In the beginning I attempted to meet with this therapist to discuss my son's condition and treatment, however she repeatedly refused my requests unless of course I was willing to pay her for a session. This I refused! Approximately a month after the custody order was entered my son's therapist writes the courts on behalf of my son she admits to have never met me nor had she had the opportunity to review the custody evaluation. She relays to the court statements made by my son, she notes: Several months ago, I saw him in a very agitated state and he blurted out statements like:  "I don't have any rights" "Why don't kids get very many rights?"  "I didn't make this problem" "He (meaning his dad) gets to do what he wants"  When I asked Andrew if he thought he'd like to have his own lawyer, he replied "I can't afford one, I only have a dollar"  I am writing to the Court because I feel that I am letting my patient down. I have no answer for him when he asks me plaintively; why doesn't somebody do something?  When I asked him if the wanted me to write to the judge, he became animated and wholeheartedly said "Yeah!" In her closing remarks she admits to not reviewing the evaluation or meeting me, but more importantly she points out my son's frustration with the court not protecting him. She states:  I realize that I have never met Mr. Q and that I have not had the opportunity to review the custody evaluation report. However I see myself as an advocate and voice to the Court for the minor.  I feel an obligation to report to the Court that this child is psychologically and spiritually suffering greatly and that he is becoming physically ill.  He fears for his physical safety and he is also losing faith in a system that he correctly perceives is not protecting him.  He understands that as a minor he is unable to legally act on his own behalf and despairs at his inability to protect himself and wonders why the adults in his life are ignoring his pleas for protection and relief. The judge suspended visitation, I being totally ignorant as to how to defend myself I just let it all happen. Shortly there after we began father son therapy, the sessions consisted of a lot of silence this due to my son refusing to participate. It was worse in the waiting room before the sessions, his mother would wait with him and neither would speak to me even when I would speak to them. It became so uncomfortable that the therapist requested that I come to the session ten minutes later and enter by way of the back door. This went of for about four weeks, and then at the beginning of a session Andrew told me that he didnít want to see me anymore. He told me that, maybe he would feel differently in three or four years, but not now. I told my son I would agree not to see him until he was ready and that I would always be there for him if he needed me. That was in October 1998 and needless to say I was devastated, I had never felt such pain and emptiness. Two months passed and on December 3rd of that same year, I received a phone call from Doctor Linzer. She told me that she had made a terrible mistake, and that I was right Andrew was being brainwashed. She told me that Andrew has been cut off from her, just as he was cut off from me. She told me that she believed Andrew was a victim of Parental Alienation Syndrome, and that he was very ill and in need of help. She said she had an article that explained what was happening to my son, and that she would sell me a copy if interested. She told me that Andrew was a suicide risk and asked me what she should do and I instructed her to immediately write the judge and inform him of her concern for Andrew. In her letter to the judge she openly admits to her negligence and damage it caused, she states:  I stated in my July 17th letter, that I had never seen Dr. Schaefer's custody evaluation said that I had never before met Mr. Q,  On July 29th, I recommended that visitation be temporarily suspended and that the father-son psychotherapy should commence immediately.  Suspending visitation did not have the hoped for effect, of making Andrew feel safer, and more able to make good use of the psychotherapy with Dr. Hilmo. Rather it had the reverse effect of giving Andrew a way to sever his relationship with his father. She also points out my exwifes intentional sabotage of the father son therapy; this by increasing the pressure put on my son. She states:  In order to prevent the joint reunification psychotherapy from being fully implemented, Andrew's symptoms increased dramatically, Ms. Q declared Andrew SUICIDAL and the therapy process was derailed almost immediately. She states that after my son ended his relationship with me he questioned his decision, so they explored it together. She explained to my son that she didn't think ending the relationship was in his best interest and this upset him. She also tells of my exwifes response to her opinion, which seems to make clear why she had hired her in the first place.  . He was extremely angry with me that I did not agree with him. Ms. Q spoke with me (without Andrew present) for the last few minutes of this session. She too was very agitated and angry with me.  She asked me why I thought Andrew did not want to see his father. I told her point blank that it was my belief that Andrew did not want to see his father because Andrew was being loyal to her.  She told me that she was disappointed in me and commanded me not to make Andrew be m psychotherapy with his father When I asked her if she wanted to reschedule, she left my office in a huff, saying. "What's the point?"  Once I told Andrew that I didn't support his decision not to see his father and once I told Ms. Q that Andrew was doing this for her, the therapeutic alliance was disrupted.  I was now viewed by both Andrew and his mother as not supporting their view of reality and thus not to be trusted.  In effect, Andrew is now alienated from me, just as he is from his father. She makes clear her concern for my son's well being and notes her attempt in getting assistance from the court, she notes:  I was concerned about Andrews's well being. I called and spoke to Ruthanne Alien (Family Court Services mediator) on October 6. I left a voice mail for Dr. Hilmo on October 6. I called to inform them regarding the situation and to consult with them due to my concerns regarding Andrew. I was aware that Andrew was cut off from his psychotherapy with me and with Dr. Hilmo and from all contact with his father. There is no mention as to what or any action taken by Family Court Services. Another thing that puzzles me is that her Oct. 6th phone call to Ruthanne Allen seems to be the last action taken by Dr. Linzer. My question is why did it take her 2 months to notify me as to my son's situation? She then gives her diagnoses:  After a year and a half of involvement in this case, I feel confident in making the diagnosis of Parental Alienation Syndrome, with Ms. Q being the alienating parent and with Mr. Q being, the target parent  I supplied both Mr. Q and. Ms. Harper with two articles written by Deirdre Rand Ph.D. The Spectrum of parental alienation Syndrome (Parts I and II) published in 1997 ill the American Journal of Forensic Psychology (articles enclosed to the Court)  If she persists in programming Andrew to denigrate his father, the visits will once again result in severe psychiatric symptoms that put Andrew at high risk for sell-destructive behavior (i.e. SUICIDE)  In extreme cases, children have been removed from the alienating parent's custody.  It is imperative that the alienating parent not be allowed any opportunity to interfere with the reunification process while it is occurring,  I have worked with PAS cases m the past and it is my belief that ANDREW IS in particular, a high-risk youngster He is a very fragile, agitated, enmeshed with his mother, disturbed ten year old.  If Andrew is to be reunited with his father, several things need to happen. First of all, Mr. Q needs to take an active stance. Mr. Q must pursue the reunification and be prepared to incur financial expense a Special Master, and be prepared to get more emotional abuse from Andrew. He must be able to continue to hang in there and be there for Andrew. This will be difficult and painful for both Mr. Q and for Andrew.  It is my belief that the reunification process cannot be successful without the backing of the Court (i.e. Court orders). Andrew cannot be asked if he wants to visit his father. In his custody evaluation, Dr. Schaefer recommended that visitation be increased and not be dependent on Andrews views on the matter.  The only way Andrew can begin to have a positive relationship with his father, is if his mother and the others on her side of the family who are programming him to denigrate his father can be stopped from doing, this. She seems to make clear the course of action that needed to be taken, that is until her closing statements:  I have not seen Andrew for two months and cant report on his current status. I would suggest that Dr. Milton Schaefer be contacted to see if he might be available to update his custody evaluation.  It is possible that a Special Master might be helpful m this case. If Mr. Q is able and willing to take an active stance, reunification may be possible.  Whether reunification is attempted or not, Andrew is a very unhappy, apprehensive, disturbed youngster who needs psychological assistance. Shortly after the judge received this letter he met with both my ex-wife and I in chambers, he told my ex-wife that if this was true she could lose custody of our son. Then decides on ordering the updated evaluation, but had he read the first one which was received by the courts only 6 months earlier he would have seen that it also described Parental Alienation was occurring. This was in December 1998 and it took nearly a month to begin the updated evaluation, when I met with Dr. Schaefer I asked him why he didnít point out Parental Alienation. He told me he did he just didnít spell it out that he said it in the report. Once again the evaluators vacation schedule caused long delays in the evaluation process, a total of 10 months to perform 22 hours of work. Approximately one week prior to the hearing, the evaluator phoned me to inform me that the cost of the evaluation exceeded the initial retainer by twelve hundred dollars, and that my half was six hundred dollars. I told him that was fine and that I could pay him a hundred dollars a month until paid, he rejected this offer telling me that it had been his experience that if I didnít like the results then he wouldnít get paid. He informed me that unless I paid him in full he would not release the finding to the court. He followed up by sending the court a letter stating I refused to pay the additional cost, and because of this refusal he would not be able to release the finding to the court. He even goes as far as to ask for the assistance of the court in recovering his fees. I phoned Judge Blea to see if the evaluator could do this, I left a message with his clerk and she told me that if the report was not received the case would be closed and that I would have to basically start over by refilling. The judge never returned my call and the case was closed. Shortly after this I attempted see my son and my ex-wife refused to open the door then she disconnected the phone. I phoned the evaluator pleading with him to help me and my son explaining that all contact was cut off. He asked me if I knew that my ex-wife was very ill, I told him I had no knowledge of that and asked him what was wrong. He told me that she had been hospitalized for mental illness three times over a period of a year. But he still refused to release the report to the court, I then contacted Ruthanne Allen at Family Court Services informing her what Dr. Schaefer had told me and that I have an order for joint custody and that if my ex-wife wasnít able to care for my son then he needed to be with me. She told me that they were through with this case and if I wanted help I would have to take it back to court. That was in December of 1999 and since then I have kept tabs on my son by way of a next door neighbor, he tells me that my son has no friends, that he stays in the house most of the time. I have gotten my son's recent grades from his school and he has gone from an A student before the divorce to a D student now. Christmas last year I sent cards from his grandmother, great grandmother, and myself by way of his neighbor, since giving my son the cards the family no longer talks to him.

The Win Child Custody and Custody Evaluation Videos will prove invaluable for your case.

Order Form:  Select Video Option Below and Click the "Buy Now" Button for Secure Order

Select Video Option for Order

horizontal rule

Child Custody Network Tel 1-800-805-5226
© Child Custody Network