1st Full-Time Family Court Journalist Helps Mom Keep Custody—for Now
Investigative reporting by the first full-time Family Court journalist ever appears to have helped a mother keep custody and protect her children—for now.
Until recently, journalists in the UK have not been allowed to report on custody cases, so this coverage and the subsequent “win” for the mother were cause for celebration by advocates and activists.
But delving deeper it becomes apparent that this unusually lucky mother has not really won her case. Despite some favorable findings and orders, the sword of Damocles remains poised overhead. And, despite good intentions, the journalist did not get the problem in Family Court right. Just more diversion from what is really going on.
No, the mom in this article is not safe, just like no mother is, from the ravages of Family Court. She is not immune from further unjust rulings that endanger her children, even though she has gotten what few mothers do: clear judicial findings the father has been seriously abusive and an order restricting him to supervised visits. And amazingly, she was not found to be alienating the kids from him even though that was reported by the evaluator.
But the judge left the door wide open, saying this state of affairs was just “for the time being”. For the time being. After 8 torturous years of battling to keep and protect her children, it is only for the time being. And this mother is one of the lucky ones.
Worse, the judge said she wants the teenage daughter, who does not want to visit her abusive father at all, to have a better relationship with him “before it’s too late”. This sounds ominously like a precursor to some form of “reunification therapy”, often used to force kids into contact with their abusive or molesting father.
But okay, so at least mom and kids are spared for now, and it appears to be because the public’s eyes are trained on the judge, thanks to an intrepid journalist. That is worth celebrating.
Keep in mind, though, that a common ploy used by judges in countries that have always allowed media reporting on custody cases, is to kick the can down the road. Wear down reporters with continuances and interim hearings. Wait until they are busy on other cases and matters. Wait until the public gets weary of it and stops paying attention.
Then let the sword drop. Then give the abuser custody. When nobody is looking or cares anymore.
In this new article Family Court Files: Psychologist’s Evidence Used to Ramp Up Allegations of Parental Alienation, Hannah Summers places the focus—and implicit blame—on the “unregulated” evaluator employing the controversial theory of “parental alienation” in her analysis. The tagline reads: the case raises questions about unregulated specialists.
Hannah is, thus, inadvertently drawing women and the public down two PSC Crisis Rabbit Holes at once: the Parental Alienation [PA] and Court Appointee Rabbit Holes. The PA Rabbit Hole article explains how the concept of PA is not the problem and banning it is not the solution. The upcoming Court Appointee Rabbit Hole article will explain how court appointees are also not the problem and regulating them is not the solution.
Judges do not “believe” evaluators’ reports. They are not being misled by them. They are not stupid. They can see the evidence that supports the mother is not alienating and the father is abusive.
No, judges credit evaluators—or not, depending on what their report says. If it comports with the Family Court agenda, it’s used; if not, it’s not.
The mother’s case in Hannah’s article is a perfect example. A typical appointee did what she was supposed to do: blame the mother so the judge would have something to hang her/his hat on when switching custody to the father.
But, damn, the press got involved, so the judge chose not to credit it. The public would easily see through the journalist’s reporting that the evaluator was wrongly accusing a good mother of alienating while minimizing the father’s abuse.
Using “unregulated” appointees simply makes it easier for judges to find ones who will lie about mothers, as it is a bit harder to hold them accountable. But, even in countries where appointees must be regulated/qualified, it makes no difference. And, anyway, most jurisdictions have solved this problem by giving court appointees immunity. So they can say whatever they want, regardless of veracity.
Going down various rabbit holes diverts reporters from inculpating the real culprit: judges working within a system rigged to entitle fathers. No wonder the Old Boy Network [OBN] is allowing MSM to publish these stories. As long as they do not pinpoint what is really going on…
MEGAN’S STORY
Keep in mind while reading Megan’s* story that she is a doctor, so her status and access to money may have made it a bit harder for judges to switch custody. More likely, it is because her ex is a foreigner which sometimes works to the advantage of the mother, as it becomes an issue of State control over children rather than father control. It’s never a woman’s power that decides the outcome.
Megan met her ex, a Middle Easterner, in 2008. Soon after, they had two children but never married. When the youngest child was two, they separated and the father moved out of the UK. He came back occasionally for visits. There were some problems with these visitations (not surprisingly) and in 2016, when the kids were 4 and 6 years-old, he filed a motion for custody.
Megan then applied for a Restraining Order detailing her ex’s abuse. This included extreme verbal abuse and threats to kill her and her mother, much in front of the kids.
The first judge granted the RO and made numerous findings against the father. He found the father had launched a campaign of controlling behavior and harassment of Megan. He found the father had said “vile” things to Megan in front of their children.
When you die I will have the children. You’re the doctor, you know how people die…I’m going to sort you out [assault].
(Note: Threats to kill and assault go well beyond “vile”—they are criminal and indicate he is quite dangerous. Calling them vile minimizes the danger he poses.)
In 2020, the father again filed for custody and a GAL [guardian ad litem] was appointed. The next year, an evaluator was appointed via a children’s charity that is affiliated with the court. This evaluator is known in the UK for spinning her reports to favor the father.
The evaluator report was filed in early ’22 and, not surprisingly, it accused Megan of alienation. Megan filed a motion to remove her report/evidence from the case based on her lack of qualification for the job. However, there was a high-profile appellate case against the evaluator filed by another mother whom she had falsely accused of alienation. This was based largely on the fact that the evaluator was not “regulated”. Megan’s case was delayed until that case resolved.
At some point, Judge Frances Judd was assigned to the case. She had already been taken off one case by the appellate court after being caught on a hot mic denigrating the mother (i.e. doing her job). She had refused to recuse herself so the mother took it to the Appellate Court and won.
The ridiculous appellate decision on whether unregulated psychologists can be used in custody cases was that the term “psychologist” itself is not regulated. So that means judges can appoint anyone, which meant Megan could not get rid of her evaluator. So she did the only thing available: requested the evidence not be relied on.
As mentioned above, Judge Judd did not rely on the report. With the public’s eyes on her, she found that Megan had not engaged in alienating behaviors.
She made findings the father had been abusive. She described him as "intimidating and bullying". She noted the previous judge’s findings of his abusive behavior and his continued verbal abuse during visits.
On those grounds, she denied the father’s motion for custody and continued his supervised visits. However, she said many things which indicated she would like visits to become unsupervised. Then what? The next step after that is joint custody. The judge need only say the abuse is in the past to order that. If only the father can stop being abusive long enough to say that…
Judge Judd did nothing about the fact the father was in major arrears in child support. This refusal to pay support suggests his goal in getting custody may be largely financial. Meanwhile, he is allowed to pay for expensive attorneys and Megan suffers having to support the children herself. Good thing she’s a doctor. Most mothers suffer even more.
TAKEAWAY
Although it’s great that Megan has retained custody and the visits remain supervised for now, the takeaway is that even in a best case scenario like this one, Family Court is still horrific for women. They still do not have the power they need and must continue to fight and fear the worst, often until the children age out of the system.
The fact that the father is abusive should mean the mother automatically gets sole custody and is able to decide if, when, and how the children visit with him. That would put an end to the interminable Family Court proceedings. And it will give men a self-serving reason to not abuse their wife and children.
But, of course, that would mean women have power in the family, and that is anathema to the Family Court agenda. It is men who must retain power at all costs, even if they are abusive or violent. And judges are the ones charged with empowering them.
So don’t be too distracted by this mother’s “win”. Stay focused on the fact that women still do not have the power to keep or protect their children—and will not ever—until cases are heard in a real civil court with a jury as fact finder, not a judge.
Join The Women’s Coalition to support our fight to empower women! And consider joining our activist arm: Sisters in Solidarity if you want to engage in activism.
*Megan is not the mother’s real name.
SISTERS IN SOLIDARITY
Our next forum will be on May 18th so mark your calendars!
If you’d like to join SIS, please read this column and fill out the linked form. You will receive an invitation to the zoom a few days before.
CHAPTER 13, PART 2 PUBLISHED!
“Finishing School for Fathers” is Chapter 13 of Dr. Blue’s book: Mother-Fucking: The Saga of One Fucked Mother.
In this chapter, Legion bemoans how women are the majority yet men have ruled for 12K years and made decisions that cause so much harm to women and society. She fantasizes about men being required to attend a “finishing school” before marriage—a program to prepare and qualify them for being good fathers, or as she puts it: good Ancestors, as we are all “Ancestors in Training”. In retrospect, she sees Herry had no thought of being a good father or husband, only a despot, which patriarchal society and Family Court encouraged and enabled.
Legion ruminates on how history disappears women’s contributions to the world; how male domination and wars have caused so much damage; how men have not ever really listened to women; and how even famous civil rights leaders and progressives have not promoted women’s everyday rights and needs, especially in the family.
Chapters are stand-alone interesting so you can begin reading anywhere. A Cast of Characters follows to help readers at any point. All published chapters are included in the Women’s Coalition News & Views Section: “The Saga of One F**ked Mother”. Sequential chapters are published every Wednesday. Of course, subscribers will find each new chapter in their inboxes, so make sure to subscribe if you haven’t yet!
TEASERS
The Double Standard: [Men] are fully and in all matters entitled, as are many, many liberal and progressive men like Martin Luther King, Jr, and Thomas Jefferson or regressive and conservative men like acid‑throwing Taliban fathers and clitoris‑cutting African fathers unteaching sons before Herry, to oppress and to do and to say unto any and all women whom they choose to that which they would not at all stand a second still for if it were done or said or oppressed unto themselves.
All, absolutely all, of the World’s problems, issues and situations requiring change or solution stem from and, therefore, can only be relieved and solved and their horrific impact much, much diminished by one thing: the relinquishing of male supremacy and dominance over Not Males in all matters.
You may also give a gift subscription to a mother who is going through her own Family Court nightmare and doesn’t understand why.
Or you can support the Coalition’s work through a one-time or recurring contribution at paypal.me/TheWomensCoalition.
All contributions, large and small, are greatly appreciated!
There is nothing dangerous or “vile” enough for the courts to remove fathers from the picture. It simply becomes a fake rehabilitation process with a racketeering ring until the mother is broke and the children are delivered to a dangerous lunatic on a silver platter.
Not since the 1990’s outside of NYC has there been a mother who has been able to send a family court judge to jail for corruption - she used a hidden camera and wire- detectives sent her into corrupt family attorneys and planted a bug- its on dateline or something similar- the imagery / video captured blatant cash exchanging hands. Since then, FBI and detectives stopped going after any “family court judges” and wont allow undercovers to catch them. Corrupt abuse of power to help friend family attorneys cases has therefore grown out of criminal oversight complicancy. Therefore, I would say this is a very small step. To catch a criminal disguised as a fair judge, these court watchers wpuld be best served wearing a wire at the local water holes judges hang out at.