Brave Girls Escape Molester Father "Smashing & Jumping" Through Window
And: It's Not Reunification; It's Coercion
Two girls escaped from their molester father’s house in the middle of the night “smashing and jumping” through a window, according to a new journal article.
They had been ordered into the father’s sole custody after disclosing sexual, physical, and emotional abuse by him. And they were not having it…
This heart wrenching case was analyzed, along with two similar cases, in a “legal narrative case law study” published this month in a special issue of the UK Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law.
The stated goal of the study was to “investigate the experiences of the so-called ‘alienated child’ facing ‘reunification interventions’ in the family court system from the point of view of the child”. In other words, it is an analysis of three cases in which the mothers were falsely found to be alienating, custody was switched to the father, and “reunification” was ordered.
The investigation does a good job of exposing the torture and immense damage done to these children via Family Court. Unfortunately, this is offset by confounding and ambiguous observations and conclusions that mislead the reader as to what is really going on in family courts.
A main problem with the analysis is that it puts the blame on court-appointees. There is a lot of dithering about “unregulated” vs. “regulated” appointees, but in the end it is appropriately acknowledged that does not really make a difference.
The idea the study conveys is that court-appointed “experts” are causing judges to believe that mothers are alienating the children, which in turn leads them to make orders switching custody and for “reunification” with the fathers. That, however, is not what is happening in Family Court. Judges are not being fooled by their very own appointees and “reunification” is actually “coercion” to get kids to shut up about the father’s abuse and comply with court orders to live with him.
Judges appoint professionals who are affiliated with the court system and are trusted to go along with the agenda. Their reports are preordained to give judges a basis upon which to switch custody to the father. Judges have the evidence of abuse by the father; they just use the appointee reports to discredit the mother and children.
So, no, the subordinate appointees are not the problem and positioning them as such diverts from the real cause of the crisis. The custody-switching scheme is instigated at the top—the Old Boy Network. Family Court judges are just doing the old boys’ bidding.
We’ll go into more depth about how the article is also not getting at the real problem of “reunification” in the TAKEAWAYS section below.
There are three cases investigated in the study, but we’ll just look at the one with the kids who made the brave, daring escape.
GIRLS DISCLOSE ABUSE
Emily* separated from her husband in 2016. The custody battle in Family Court began three years later.
Zoe (now 13) and Stella (now 11) had disclosed abuse by their father. This included physical, sexual and emotional abuse.
A medical doctor reported that Stella had been physically assaulted by the father and she was afraid to be with him. Zoe also disclosed physical abuse.
The girls said their father would watch them taking showers and play “inappropriate games” with them. The father also used surveillance cameras in their bedrooms to watch them.
An “Independent” Social Worker [ISW] was appointed to do an evaluation. Zoe was found competent to represent herself to the court and Stella was appointed a guardian ad litem [GAL].
The father claimed the reason the girls didn’t want to see him was because Emily was alienating the girls from him. The ISW reported to the court that the girls were “suffering from severe parental alienation which has had a significant impact on their emotional development”. She recommended they be taken away from Emily and begin a reunification program in order to “repair their relationship with the Father”.
A few years into the custody battle, there was a four-day trial. Judge Sara Watson heard all the evidence of the father’s abuse and about the girls’ strong desire to live with their mother. She ignored all of that and found Emily had alienated the girls.
Watson granted the father sole custody and ordered no contact with Emily. She implemented a “residential reunification” program, in which the girls would live with their father for at least 90 days while being “reunified”. Implied, of course, is the threat that if the “reunifying” did not work, the isolation from their mother would continue.
THE GIRLS ESCAPE
The ISW actually moved into the father’s place to conduct the “residential reunification”. That’s a new one. In the U.S. they use hotels or camps.
The girls expressed their displeasure at the situation.
The girls were very vocal about their dislike of the Father and the ISW and were very destructive, including smashing the television and smashing bowls”.
They lasted only five days at their father’s house before making their escape. The girls “smashed” a window and jumped out in the early hours of the morning. Some roadside workers found them and called the police. Zoe was taken to the hospital to treat an injury from “smashing” the window.
The father allowed the girls to be placed in foster care temporarily—but insisted on separate homes for them. So now the girls were not only separated from their mother, but from each other. They were not allowed friends, cell phones, or social media.
A new ISW was appointed and she continued with other “reunification” measures. A new judge was also assigned: Judge Nathalie Lieven. She continued Watson’s finding that Emily had alienated the girls and the “reunification” measures.
Stella was forced to return to her father’s house. Zoe stayed in foster care. She was experiencing suicidal ideation and self-harming—cutting on her legs. She called a hotline one night and was brought to a children’s mental health clinic.
Since they were not allowed to see their mother, the girls tried to sneak in hugs with her any way they could—through a school fence, at a school play… Zoe and Stella were only allowed to see each other with the father present. But it was just too distressing for Zoe to be around her father. Zoe ran away to her mom from foster care a few times but police always brought her back.
When it became obvious that Zoe was not going to break, and may even be a liability if she actually did commit suicide, Judge Lieven finally allowed her to go home to her mother.
Meanwhile, Stella kept running away from her father’s house and eventually the father got tired of it. He allowed her to live with Emily’s partner’s parents, the step-grandparents—as long as they would allow him access to her. Notice how the father gets what he wants. The judges just rubber stamp his wishes.
CLEAN UP ON AISLE 5
In the end, Judge Lieven likely knew she was being watched by journalists and her case was part of a study, and she had better do a clean up on aisle 5. She made some public, nonsensical, contradictory statements to shift blame away from her and her accomplices in the custody switching scheme.
Amongst other things, she claimed the “label” of parental alienation had not been “helpful”, had “embedded conflict” and had given “a sense that one parent is right…and the other wrong”.
I do not think that the label of parental alienation is at all helpful, indeed in this case it has been thoroughly unhelpful, by embedding conflict and a sense that one parent is right and justified, and the other parent wrong and has acted inappropriately.
That is complete absurdity—out of the mouth of a judge who made false findings of alienation to take the girls away from their mother.
In fact, Judge Lieven is the one alienating. It was her orders that kept the girls isolated from their mother and enabled the father to alienate. And she is still alienating Stella to this day by not allowing her to live with her mother.
Yet, the article commends this sociopathic judge! Lieven is applauded for saying the “label” of parental alienation is the problem. She is lauded for giving the girls a voice, which she never really did—and is still not doing.
Judge Lieven should not be praised for anything. She should be clearly denounced for her direct and indirect horrific abuse of these children and their mother—all in service of male entitlement.
TAKEAWAYS
So there you have it. Another sordid tale of Family Court judges tormenting a mother and her children in service of the agenda to keep men empowered after divorce.
There is much made in the article about the “reunification” aspect of this case but it doesn’t get the issue right. Reunification treatment, in and of itself, is not bad. It is to help a child who has really been alienated from a loving parent. And that is a good thing.
But Emily did not alienate her girls from their father. They were alienated from him because of their father’s abuse, so the alienation was both organic and justified. Using “reunification interventions” in this case was, therefore, wrong and harmful.
Importantly, using the word “reunification” for what these judges did is the real problem. They did not “reunify”. They coerced the children into contact with their father, from whom they were rightly alienated, to silence them about his abuse and compel compliance with court orders.
Judges using the word “reunification” or “reunification therapy” for the abuse they are ordering is a despicable sham, meant to disguise their nefarious goal. And when academics, journalists, advocates, and others acquiesce and agree to call it reunification, they are playing into the farce.
Instead of decrying “reunification”, activists should replace it with the concept of “coercion”. Judges are ordering “coercive measures”, not “reunification interventions”. Children are being coerced into contact with the abusive father, not reunified.
It should be called what it really is: court-ordered coercion, in which coercive persuasion (brainwashing) is often used to achieve the goal of getting children under the control of the father.
And judges should be called out for lying about mothers alienating, which supposedly justifies this use of coercive measures, rather than placing blame on the “label” or “belief system” of parental alienation. It should be made crystal clear that judges are lying about mothers in their goal of switching custody to fathers.
Academics and journalists should be telling it like it is. But that probably won’t happen any time soon. After all, that would be going up against the power elite.
So women need to spread the truth ourselves in independent and social media like here on Substack. If you’d like to engage in activism with our Sisters in Solidarity, please read this and fill out this form.
You can make a difference by liking, commenting, and sharing our columns.
IN OTHER NEWS
CHAPTER 27 [CONTINUED] IS OUT!
Chapter 27, Act II, Part 2 continues. The second trial, for modification of custody filed by Herry, is over and Legion awaits the judgment. She is sure the the judge is going to give Herry what he wants: sole custody. She knows Herry’s ultimate goal/revenge is to get her to commit suicide by taking the boys away from her—completely.
Legion is so distressed at the thought of losing her boys that she’s been unable to sleep, so she asks her doctor for a sedative. But he sends her to the emergency room where she is placed in the psych unit and coerced into accepting a 2-week hold under threat of involuntary, indefinite committal. She’s sure Herry is behind the whole escapade. The judge himself had taken custody of his four children and had his wife permanently committed. It is an age-old, patriarchal tradition to institutionalize errant and no-longer-useful wives.
In the last section, a custody modification trial is allowed due to the flagrant lie that Legion had interfered with visitation. The same evaluator who spun the case against Legion in the first trial is re-appointed and her new report is chock full of blatant lies. The judge will not speak with the boys to get to the truth of the matter or to ask their preference, even though they are 14, 12, and 10. Legion testifies tearfully on the stand in her defense, suspecting the judge has already made his decision…
CHAPTER 27 of Mother-Fucking: The Saga of One Fucked Mother begins with Act I of “The Opera”—from Book 3, the last part of the book. “The Opera” has three Acts with five Parts—one for each of the three Family Court and two Appellate Court trials. Chapter 27 covers Acts I and II: the first two Family Court trials and the first Appellate Court trial. [This is a long chapter and will be published in newsletter-sized bites.]
Dr. Blue’s novel is based on her own experience of the Custody Crisis. It uniquely conveys how Family Court judges are “mother-fucking” women—a form of systemic oppression and violence directed at ex-wives—as protagonist Legion is systematically and methodically deprived of her children and money and reduced to “one fucked mother”.
Chapters are stand-alone interesting so you can begin reading anywhere. A Cast of Characters follows to help readers at any point [on the web page]. All published chapters are included in the Section: “Saga of One F**ked Mother” accessible on the top bar of the home page of Women’s Coalition News & Views. Sequential chapters are published every Wednesday and subscribers will find them in their inboxes, so make sure to subscribe if you haven’t yet!
TEASERS
The Cunt won’t be dead—but shit! That––permanent maternal‑deprivation from her sons––that’ll do it. That’ll be just as good as dead! Work it, Baby! Work it! What’s that cadence again now, ya’ know, the one we in the military all march so very well to, “You can take a woman, Cut the bitch in two; I can fuck the lower half and give the upper half to you!”
…Same ol’ control, dominion and domination fuckover of the DEhuman as that of the last 12 or so millennia ...
You may also give a gift subscription to a friend who is going through the Family Court nightmare.
Or feel free to support the Coalition’s work through a one-time or recurring contribution at paypal.me/TheWomensCoalition.
All contributions are greatly appreciated & thanks to everyone who has subscribed!
Family court judges endanger women and children. Patriarchy dominates family court. Women have no enforceable rights. Children have no protection. Family court must end.
They’re torturing our children. None of the actions taken are supported by the medical community. Dcf isn’t involved in these cases. This is the family court system being weaponized against innocent children without a medical doctor endorsing these barbaric, trauma inducing, inhumane orders.
Thank you for your continued exposure of child abuse resulting from DARVO/weaponization of family courts, which, void of oversight, is running rampant throughout the US and beyond.