An Example of an Anti-Father’s Rights, Liberal Moron!

If You Support Men’s and Father’s For Equal Parental Rights, You Have to Vote for Cara Nicole, Not Juan Mendez! Why? Because Juan Mendez, An Example of an Anti-Father’s Rights, Liberal Moron!  – Men’s Rights Group of AZ

If you think Juan Mendez is a complete fool, moron and just unfit to hold public office your not the only one!

In fact, according to the American’s for Parental Equality and men’s rights advocates, you could be right!

Many men’s and father’s rights activist have long held the opinion that Juan Mendez has single-handedly  worked against legislation to change bias family court laws. This opinion appears to be true in recent public statements Juan Mendez has made.

Juan Mendez was recently asked,

“What do you plan to do to bring equality to fathers being denied rights to their children in family court when there is no domestic violence or criminal history?”

Juan Mendez looked a little shocked by the question and even asked for it to be repeated so he could compose himself. Then, the idiot (in our opinion) spilled his feminist guts.

At least from his statements…

Mendez openly plans to keep denying father’s rights to their biological children.

A Facebook video of this moron has now reached 34 thousand views of how Mendez side-stepped the entire question while throwing a bone to his liberal-feminist allies.

Source: Juan Mendez, An Example of an Anti-Father’s Rights, Liberal Moron! – Men’s Rights Group of AZ

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Respect free speech and the open arena of ideas | Civil Rights in Family Law Florida

socfreespeech-468x60-06122016-1149As many of you know, we just had a magnificent conference on men’s issues in London, England. It was a brilliant event that went off without a hitch.socheader1 Thanks to the work of Mike Buchanan it was a full house, wall to wall with amazing people.

The only downer of the entire event was that I had to make the announcement during my speech that the  A Voice for Men Facebook page was deleted by the management there. Also, at this point I can say that my appeal to have the page reinstated has gone ignored. 35,000 followers dismissed by Facebook for not towing the feminist, politically correct line.

This is part of a now quite familiar trend of social media platforms, which are essentially the modern equivalent of what we used to call telecommunications companies, controlling the expression and even the ideas of their customers.

Every time one of these events happens on Twitter, (and again) Facebook or other popular outlet, we see people in the comments lamenting the dogmatic discrimination and suggesting that “someone” needs to create an alternative platform.

Here’s your chance to reclaim free speechsocfreespeech-468x60-06122016-1149

They’re right. Someone needs to create alternatives that respect free speech and the open arena of ideas. So we did.

It’s now located at socfreespeech.com.

socfreespeech-468x60-06122016-1149

Using Reddit open source software, we have created a platform where current events and self-published ideas can be discussed without the interference of political correctness.

As you will see in the terms of service, there is a very narrow range of postings not permitted. They are as follows:

Continue reading Respect free speech and the open arena of ideas | Civil Rights in Family Law Florida

Children should not be allowed to drive the visitation bus!


By Linda J. Gottlieb, L.M.F.T., L.C.S.W. ~

To any rational, mature, objective parent or professional, the reason for this declaration could be justified by merely pondering the following question: “How reassured would you feel if you were standing trial for a crime, and your jury was comprised entirely of 18-year-olds?”

The reason children should not be empowered to make a decision about visitation with a parent is as obvious as why no one would feel comfortable having only 18 year olds sitting in judgment of us. A child’s judgment, insight, perception, reality testing, and emotions only barely reach maturity by the END of adolescence.

One only has to read the epistemological research and studies undertaken by Jean Piaget, philosopher and developmental psychologist, who wrote the “Bible” upon which educators rely to understand the cognitive development of children.Alienation is a crime - 2015Children do not have the emotional and cognitive abilities do evaluate for themselves what is in their best interests; to theorize what it would be like to have a parent eradicated from their lives; to be able to discriminate what is rational, truthful, and moral amidst all the information their parents and other adults impart to them—especially about the malicious, fabricated, and fanciful data from the alienating parent. Children, for example, think very concretely until the age of 8; that is why they actually do believe, “Step on a crack, break my mother’s back.”

Not until much older, can they discriminate reality from fantasy, which is why they should not see horror shows until much older. The ability to think abstractly starts at the beginning of adolescence and is still insufficiently mature by 18. Children lack wisdom! And children further do not have the emotional wherewithal to contradict the alienating parent—-if that parent is the residential parent—-as they are so dependent upon that parent.

So to placate the alienated parent regarding the visit refusal, the court sanctions it by making an ineffective order for the child to undergo a course of individual therapy in the hopes of readying the child for a relationship with the alienated parent. Every time I hear the unsubstantiated platitude for the therapist, “to prepare the child for contact with the alienated parent,” I want to erupt.

Because of their immature cognitive and emotional abilities as previously discussed, children do not possess the facility for abstraction. They cannot participate in a theoretical discussion about what an appropriate relationship entails; nor can they comprehend a desire for something in the abstraction. A child, therefore, cannot have a discussion about desiring a relationship with someone who is in the absentia—-especially a brainwashed child; nor can a child participate in determining what to expect from the relationship with that “someone.”

That “someone” needs to be concrete, in person, in the flesh and blood. The therapist cannot, therefore, prepare the child through intellectualism and abstraction for the re-building of a relationship with someone else. To be able to do this is a fantasy perpetuated by an adversarial child custody system in order to appease the parties and deceive one another into believing that the alienation is being addressed. Individual therapy will not be able to resolve this. To do is also a fantasy perpetuated by the mental health community—-partially out of ignorance, partially out of an opposing belief system from this therapist’s about the power of the therapist and about how people change, and partially to assure our continued employment. I have lost count of the number of preposterous requests I have received asking me to treat a child whom I have never met in order “to ready them to reunite” with a parent, whom I have also never met and know nothing about. I am being asked to treat a relationship without having observed and examined it!

Would a doctor diagnose for a disease without observing/examining the patient?
But why is therapy necessary at all to connect a child to a loving and formally loved parent? The PAS-aware professional must educate the judicial system that PAS children’s expressed hatred for and refusal to visit with the targeted/alienated parent are not their true feelings—-no more than these were the feelings of the thousands of foster children with whom I had worked with during a period of 24 years: not a single foster child ever expressed a hatred for her/his parents or a refusal to visit. Indeed, the two most frequently asked questions were, “When can I go home?” and “When is my next visit with my mommy and daddy?” You have to be carefully taught to hate and fear—-especially a parent.

PAS children are caught and trapped by their feelings and position: on the one hand, these children love and crave their relationship with their targeted/alienated parent; on the other hand, they are terrified of betraying their alienating parent by expressing their true feelings.
The professionals which impact child custody—-especially the judge—-must release these children from their trap by relieving them from making the decision about whether to visit or not.

The professionals who impact child custody and visitation must assume the responsibilities for which we were charged when we were licensed by our respective professions; that is, we must assume our responsibility of guaranteeing the PAS child’s right to a meaningful relationship with both parents—-that starts with the enforcement of the visitation rights of the non-residential parent.

End Parental Alienation ~~  New Service:

Linda J. Kase Gottlieb has teamed up with an attorney and certified mediator to offer low cost divorce mediation services as well as low cost services to pro se alienated parents who will need help with confronting their situation.

Naturally, Linda will be supporting joint legal custody with 50/50 physical custody when both parents are fit.  See More

By Linda J. Gottlieb, L.M.F.T., L.C.S.W.

Recently published book, The Parental Alienation Syndrome: A Family Therapy and Collaborative Systems Approach to Amelioration

The PAS-aware professional must educate the judicial system that PAS children’s expressed hatred for and refusal to visit with the targeted/alienated parent are not their true feelings.

Source: Children’s Rights: Children should not be allowed to drive the visitation bus!

Changing laws to give fathers more rights to their children after divorce.

cropped-without-dad1.png

About 20 states are considering measures that would change the laws governing which parent gets legal and physical control of a child after a divorce or separation. 

Some of the biggest battles over child custody are playing out not in courtrooms, but in statehouses.

Prompted partly by fathers concerned that men for too long have gotten short shrift in custody decisions, about 20 states are considering measures that would change the laws governing which parent gets legal and physical control of a child after a divorce or separation.

The proposals generally encourage judges to adopt custody schedules that maximize time for each parent. Some of the measures, such as those proposed in New York and Washington state, take an additional step by requiring judges to award equal time to each parent unless there is proof that such an arrangement wouldn’t be in a child’s best interests.

Critics of the bills contend that they threaten to take discretion away from judges and risk giving leverage to abusive men. They also say the laws are poorly targeted because typically the only custody cases that end up in court are ones in which former spouses are too hostile toward each other to effectively practice shared parenting anyway.

Continue reading Changing laws to give fathers more rights to their children after divorce.