CHAPTER 27: The Opera: Act I; Part 1 [cont.]
CHAPTER 27: The Opera: Act I; Part 1 [cont.]
From "The Saga of One Fucked Mother"
CHAPTER 27 of Mother-Fucking: The Saga of One Fucked Mother begins with Act I of the “Opera”. There are three Acts with five Parts—one for each of the three Family Court trials and two Appellate trials. This chapter covers Acts I and II, which include the first two Family Court trials and the first Appellate Court trial. It is a long chapter and will be published in newsletter-sized bites.
In this next section of Act I, Part 1, Legion notes that, although she had answered all the interrogatory questions, Herry just left most of his blank. Further, he did not get his witness list to the court before the first day of the trial. And there were no consequences at all for these deviations.
The judge checked off the “listen to the children” box by speaking with them off the record about which parent they wanted to live with. But he did not let anyone know what they said, at least not Legion, and excluded their testimony from the record (one way judges cover up for fathers). These early anomalies were harbingers of how horribly unfair the process would continue to be for Legion. And, of course, the evaluator did what she was appointed to do and spun the case to the father, i.e. she lied through her teeth in the “Report”, which Legion dissects in depth.
In the last section, Legion is nervous about the trial but feels confident she will get custody as all the evidence that she had been the primary and better parent supports that, except for, of course, the cherry-picked, “male-identified” evaluator. She notes that the interrogatory questions, part of the discovery phase, are almost all about finances, not who the more nurturing parent would be. The sexism inherent in the system is becoming apparent even at this early stage of the proceedings.
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. 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
Herry’s answer only arrived when it was shoved across onto our table and into the grasp of Mr. Jinx about two minutes after head nods all around at approximately 9 am opening curtain of Wednesday, 10 May 1989 … Is this legal? … Can a litigant get away with shitass unfair stalling tactics such as this because it is legal? Or, just … because he, daMan, can. And because nobody––nobody with the legal power and prowess to do something––is going to do anything the hell at all about it.
Mirzah, Jesse and Zane were asked by Judge Sol Wacotler Seizor to come in near the end of the last day of 2½ total and to tell him one by one alone and separated from each other, what their thoughts each were on the matter of their own individual custodies. This occurred. Behind closed doors somewhere. I have never known where they were nor what any one of them said.
Dr. True's Opera in Three Acts—with Five Parts
CHAPTER 27
ACT I; Part 1 [cont.]
So too, with the asking, with the questions, with the incessant questioning of the mother, these insinuating, insulting Interrogatories of ‘the Court’, of its “law”, specifically going after only the mother’s fitness here in ‘my case’ of the spring of 1989. Completely put onto the discriminating defensive the mama is.
Herry’s was the most humorous, two‑word total answer of “good health” on an otherwise, nearly entirely blank, legal‑sized sheet to Interrogatory #20, “In your opinion, what is the status of your physical and emotional health at this time? If you have been under a physician’s care or hospitalized for any reason during the preceding twelve months, state when that occurred, the name and address of the physician, and the purpose of the treatment.”
The actual answer being sought was mine to Terrorist bin Herry‑Daddee’s Interrogatory #22, “State your date of birth, and your physical and emotional health on the date prior to your marriage, during your marriage, and at the present time. List with specificity all dates that you have been hospitalized pertaining to the above‑listed date, the dates of said hospitalization, the reason for said hospitalization, and the resolution of said hospital stay. Make sure to include with your Answer all treatment and/or hospitalization that resulted from any suicide attempts by you. Have you ever attempted suicide? If so, specify the dates of said attempt, what method was utilized in the attempt, and the reason, if known, for the attempt.”
The … “so very healthy” … Dr. Herod Edinsmaier through his employed mouthpiece, Mr. Shindy Scheisser, by way of Interrogatory #22 was soooo seeking dirt. Mud. Smashing, smear‑worthy, ‘The Court’‑flinging dirt. On me, Dr. Legion True, 20th Century adult and mother multiple times over! But, too, … the Ex‑Cunt. The “Gotcha’, Bitch!” genre of muddy mother‑fuck.
I stated that I was due compensatory consideration as the primary parent and homemaker and, therefore, quite worth the “current market value” as well as possessing a “replacement value,” according to the two references given in my answer, of from between $21,500 and $46,000. That is to say, universities and other think tanks had several times over, even by 1989, researched and published in a 1983 Good Housekeeping and a February 1984 Vogue, p 121, the worth of just the labors and services of such an occupation—in the view that, if dead and/or needing an alternate, a proxy, let alone the equivalent of me, the Ex - Cunt, why this is how much money one—for example, the husband‑daddee person—out of his pocket then annually for the chores’ ‘help’ with the mundane, daily work of staying alive … of family‑raising … would actually be required to shell out!
But …
But at no time in any Act or Trial did any attorney or either judge deal with this: with Dr. Legion True’s worth—just monetary … alone—as a stay‑at‑home mother and wife!
I was further so disappointed in Herry’s answers, too, I have to say, although not in the least surprised by his … well, shall I add, reluctance to come anyfriggin’where clean with it all! Among Dr. Herod Edinsmaier’s personal belongings of worth we, Judge Seizor and I, just did not seem to get the legal opportunity neither from sworn witness testimony nor from notarized paper document evidence, to even know about the “replacement” or “current market” values of the (plastic, fake) gem‑encrusted, studded condom which Herry would in the very, very near future flash to Mirzah nor of the “raging hormones” birthday card that, with nine‑year‑old Mirzah also along again and by his side on Herry’s shopping jaunt, daMan would in just two more months’ time role‐model as ‘an appropriate greeting’ to send to the Next Cunt in Daddee’s Stash, Ms. Fannie Issicran McLive.
Among the various papers required of me “TO BE PRODUCED” to Herry via Mr. Shindy Scheisser were requests beginning right off with … money. Not beginning right off with the Boys but, instead and so–so like Dr. Herod Edinsmaier, with the $Bucks$: bank statements, savings and loan statements, credit union statements “during the past ten years,” “copies of any and all insurance policies on your life,” “copies of any Notes or any other written evidence of indebtedness as well as copies of any security agreements relating to any incurred indebtedness by you or your spouse at this time,” “copies of any real estate mortgages upon which you, individually or you or your spouse, jointly may be liable,” and then finally, of course the choicest and last one so that, in sum, no documents handed over to Herry were actually ever in fulfillment of his nonexistent requests for ones about the Boys whatsoever at all, “all medical reports and records and hospital reports and records concerning your physical or mental condition for the [mother‑fucking] last ten years, (emphases mine naturally) including but not limited to, all reports regarding any counseling you might have received.”
My such requests of this last genre to Herry? Well, no documents were forthcoming to me; he just didn’t seem to have any––long the lines and lyrics of that same ol’ song refrain of the Deny, Deny, Deny mantra about which no judge does squat when the procedural “technicality” is coming forth to daMan from a pillared community dude such as he himself, daJudge, is. Not even a Step #4 Inventory was produced to me. Zero. Zip. Zilch. No answers that related to Herry ever even having been at Creighton University, let alone, to his frequent and blatant DEhumanization activities there nor to any such counseling with Mr. Larry Brouhaha which would have been, of course, those mere two words scribbled onto that one assignment page I’d seen during the second of two marriage therapy hysterics nor to any “mental condition” of Herry’s nor to what Attorney Jazzy Jinx and I both knew existed on paper: The Wholly Telling and Weighty Eight Pages ! ! ! ! About such veridicality soooo, so much more, as the saying goes, … will be revealed! Suffice for it right now to explain here? Those Eight Pages never fuckingly appeared to us––to Respondent’s Attorney Jinx nor to me––both of us seated at the Respondent’s … the pissant woman’s … the DEhuman’s … at Legion True’s … courtroom table.
And the last interrogatory, #24, was indeed as comedic as the mother‑fucking absence of Dr. Edinsmaier’s documents’ production––in that Herry simply left mine to him blank! No answer at all––let alone, an honest one––to “State the name, address, telephone number and occupation of any person who is or may be qualified as an expert who has been retained or specifically employed in anticipation of litigation or preparation of trial and now is, as well, expected to be called as a witness at trial.”
Empty it was so Mr. Jazzy Jinx had to resend it, of course. And, of course, this resending takes days and days for a response. Herry’s answer only arrived when it was shoved across onto our table and into the grasp of Mr. Jinx about two minutes after head nods all around at approximately 9 am opening curtain of Wednesday, 10 May 1989, the first fusillade, a raspberry blast from Herry’s pillared tongue itself. Is this legal? Is this a “technicality” that means something, has any meat to it, pulls any weight at all? Can a litigant get away with shitass unfair stalling tactics such as this because it is legal? Or, just … because he, daMan, can. And because nobody––nobody with the legal power and prowess to do something––is going to do anything the hell at all about it.
That finally filled‑out sheet with answer #24 on it the first morning of Trial One contained the names as potential witnesses of nine persons. Seven of these were of folks allegedly anticipated by Petitioner Edinsmaier to be called to testify specifically and only as to my employability at veterinary institutions and practices and at hospitals for humans or veterinary‑related supply agencies in the local Ames vicinity.
Immediately again was Herry‑Daddee bringing forth testifyingly sworn proof of his parenting capabilities? Or. …or was Dr. Herod Edinsmaier presenting as witnesses everyone every which way who could possibly try to save the Good and Wonderful Pillar $a dollar or two of his$ from its being expended out … to me?!
Only one of the other two people had to do with Herry’s personal character. It cannot be too difficult to guess, Jury, what long‑, long‑time, closely associated (NOT!) colleague this one would be. Yeah, … Mr. Larry Brouhaha. Mr. Brouhaha of the “Gaaaawd, Man, do you hear what she is haranguing you with?! Do you hear her?! Her reading you all of these?!” ‘closeness’ and ‘long association’ over those two visits Herry had actually made it to, that is, to Brouhaha’s “mawwiage counseling” back the December before! From just five months’ time and a couple of very short, short appointment sessions previously! That guy! That “expert”! That “witness”! That witness to … exactly squat, I say, Jury! What a (literally) mother‑fucking industry!
And.
Only one person proposed as an upcoming witness to be called by Herry in Act One had anything at all to do … with the children! Here, again, it cannot be too difficult to guess what long‑, long‑time, closely associated family friend or relative or teacher or principal or coach or spiritual advisor or, voila, childcare provider that one person would be. JYeah, … the Dr. Edinsmaier‑charmed, in‑her‑early 30s Ms. Carrie Canard of the I’m‑so‑male‑identified, mousy‑frumpy circuit, who had had in her mere weeks and weeks of custody‑evaluating “experience” never a child nor nary a spouse of her own. But—for sure!—who had now become the “long‑, long‑time, O‑so‑knowing” commadre of the Good and Wonderful Dr. Herod Edinsmaier by the very virtue of their having known each other through a grand total of two to three hours’ worth of his visits to her office in the state capital city’s tertiary teaching hospital! That ditherer! That “expert”! That “witness”! That witness to … exactly squat, I say, Jury! What a (literally) mother‑fucking industry!
* * * *
A few moments of Part One Act One stand out. Only a few. Mirzah, Jesse and Zane were asked by Judge Sol Wacotler Seizor to come in near the end of the last day of 2½ total and to tell him one by one alone and separated from each other, what their thoughts each were on the matter of their own individual custodies. This occurred. Behind closed doors somewhere. I have never known where they were nor what any one of them said. Either during the daytimes of Trial One when Judge Seizor never revealed to me what my own children said to him nor was that which had been any of their separate statements made known to me in the final divorce decree’s “Findings of Fact”––as alleged testimonial “evidence” after Trial One’s conclusion. I have no idea to this day of the words of the three Truemaier Boys nor of their weight with … “the Court,” with daMan. And, as importantly, I have no idea either––if Herry and Mr. Scheisser did know what the statements taken from Jesse and from Zane and from Mirzah had been and what, if anything, had gone down with the Boys and with their custody––because of them. They may have. Herry – Daddee and his shyster employee Mr. Shindy Scheisser, indeed, soooo may have known!
This is huge with me.
Not in the sense that I don’t know what my Boys said. That isn’t it at all.
What matters to me is in the unmistakable fact that I, indeed, cannot trust that Herry and his lawyer did not know either. I cannot trust that they did not know either. Closed doors. Things are winding down. Where is everybody? Mr. Jinx is with me but where’s Mr. Scheisser? Hearkening back to what Mr. Jazzy Jinx had emphatically counseled me regarding fathers in his 20 years of practicing family law, … on their not really wanting their children but so desiring to make it appear like they truly, truly did, ya’ know? I cannot trust that something did or did not take place with Herry and Mr. Shindy Scheisser and daJudge––based upon the Truemaier Boys’ testimonies which have clearly been kept quite hidden from me––at right about the very last hour of Act One.
Lesser matters involved, of course, those surrounding the evidentiary testimonies which were the two of Ms. Canard and Mr. Brouhaha. Herry’s proposed experts on my veterinary or nursing expertise and, thus, my near‑future employability hardly materialized, one or two, certainly not seven. So Jinx’s and my pretrial receipt of that piece of paper with on it all of those several such names of “expert witnesses” had merely been a bullying and threatening gesture, not even an actual, upcoming reality, “Don’tcha’ dare be coming after my money, Pussy, or I’ll, I’ll … whatevah!” Like the Good and Wonderful Dr. Edinsmaier’s clenched fist poised which hasn’t yet pummeled its imperiled eye socket target––but, for sure, ominously looming there though just inches above my face. Like Loving Herry‑Daddee sneers, “Gotcha, Bitch!” as he hammers and brutalizes Down‑on‑My‑Mother‑Begging‑Knees Legion with the Squaw Creekside killings of my sons, one by one. Like how it is that young Herry Edinsmaier writes in his Creighton journal––a document purposefully withheld from and also not “produced” to ‘the Court’––that he “enjoys,” “likes,” “feels good about,” “gets pleasure out of roughing up and injuring” us Not Males, us DEhumans!
In like manner to Herry’s gait out the Othello Drive doorway that midwinter day the previous January, Mr. Brouhaha swaggered, too, right on up to the witness chair and bellowed on from it there about my spouting forth a whale of a lot of hot spit and the uselessness of Mr. Brouhaha’s laying out any more of his soooo valuable time on such a doomed couple as was the True–Edinsmaier pair. One of Herry’s other professional‑employment witnesses, a former medical colleague of his, bourgeoisified the swagger‑strut thingy, too. His even included the whole body, his ‘bounteous’ countenance spilling itself out all over the railing of the witness box. Dr. Freddie Goldstein laid his authoritative‑posturing and likewise pillared self forward sprawling his fat hulk across the wooden banister siding during his entire glorified bloviation on the passive parenting methodology of noninvolvement––read that, laissez faire “older brother”—like, Joy‑Toy‑Boy laziness––about which Dr. Goldstein, from his two loooong (NOT!) years’ worth of knowing Herry right after Hershey P A’s supervising Dr. Shark had indeed fired Herry’s ass, blatheringly testified resided either deeply or shallowly somewhere within this pathological liar of Dr. Goldstein’s pathology resident acquaintances, Dr. Herod Edinsmaier.
Naturally the final scene of Act One cannot be played out without its being the relational one in which the folie à deux of Herry with Ms. Canard stars. Donned in that same orderly navy frock with its proper white polka dot spots, Ms. Canard ascended to the witness chair by way of her unadorned navy pumps and was barely audible through her formal swearing in. At no time did she make eye contact with me. After all, I had had a preview copy of The Report––with its billable hours, of course. She proceeded to elaborate on said Report at the behest of Herry the Petitioner by way of and through another of the Good and Wonderful Doctor’s currently operating folie à deux—the one between him and his fouling mouthpiece, Mr. Shindy Scheisser.
Since there are no transcripts for Act One and only The Report, I have decided here to present it in its hexed entirety with all of its formatting, spelling and grammatical inconsistencies and errors––to the operatic tune of your choice––after I first sing out to You the Audience, $1,041.25 worth of my comments from its margins. JYeah, that’s the dollar amount billed all right for something in family law in March of 1989, anyway that was known then as a … “custody evaluation.” Equals $85.00 an hour for 12¼ hours charged.
The aria goes like so, “Mr. Jinx, I was right all along regarding Herry’s parenting and passivity. I’ve been up front with my emotionality ALWAYS; completely honest—so what else is new? ‘bout this report anyhow? It’s most of what I already knew or avowed. Now why did Custody‑Evaluating Canard go with the push‐over, ‘whatever’, lackadaisical, pornography‑purveying parent?! the abuser‑parent?! the criminal one?!
So what do I have to do to make me the ‘considered’ recommendation? Results‑wise she ruled completely on one aspect of the emotional needs entirely discounting social, physical and spiritual needs as well as Herry’s negative emotional, sexual problems and my good emotional provisions. She states these interviews obtained ‘information’. How does she know it’s the Truth?! Multiple times she makes assertions using so‑called ‘information’ she has no certainty is so!”
Then as well there are my choruses from the Report’s margins of, “I didn’t say this! Not so! I didn’t tell her this! I didn’t tell her that! And … and I explained why but she didn’t include my explanations here! This is not just due to me alone either! Where are the specifics of these nine issues I addressed with her, ie, the care and cleanliness and maintenance, proper and regular meals and by whom prepared, proper and suitable childcare personnel, educational progress, need for medical and dental or mental treatment, the Boys’ spiritual needs, supervision and control, leisure time uses, uses made of any temporary support payments!!!??? Phil Donahue’s segment on how the divorce is good for the adults but bad for the kids. Why wouldn’t she call the past five “traumatic and emotionally distressing” months a normal reaction!? Who the hell wouldn’t call that a normal reaction to them?! After all, it was Margaret Sagely who righteously recounted to me, ‘If you were not hysterical, then … then Legion, … is when I would be worried about you!’ Herry’s meal planning “casual”?! Hell, it’s Burger King and McDonald’s and Hardee’s and pizza joints for chris’sake! Did Dr. Edinsmaier express several concerns here? No, he did not. ‘Cause he knows I take great care of them! He doesn’t need to be concerned because he knows … I will be! Define this, this ‘high degree of structure’ or ‘behavior modification program: I do not spank or hit but she didn’t write that! Talk, talk, talk, then talk some more and then that’s that: nothing changes with Herry’s lazy, no‑confrontation‑at‑all‑costs approach to the Truemaier Boys’ ‘discipline’—or, more accurately, its complete and total absence thereof by their father!
She and I did not get to all of this. Ms. Canard took very few notes, and I saw no recording device so just how does she remember much of this at all?! Wha’!??? I was done ‘training’; in Kansas I was in an appointed professorship for chris’sake! Who told her that lie!? Herry doesn’t have to talk about his feelings by couching his ‘protection’ of them by telling the Boys they don’t need to be in the middle of this so they don’t even get to feel their feelings, let alone, talk about them.” What really torqued me were paragraphs that resulted in my comments of “What about the test questions re deviant sexual behaviors such as incest, bestiality, compulsive masturbation, voyeurism and exhibitionism; was he honest or is he still into lying denying!? Regarding Chapter 14 of Love Must Be Tough, ‘Angry Women, Passive Men’ and how did the test questions reveal this? I didn’t talk about this so must be from MMPI. I answered that most people are honest and most people are good! Canard stating ‘most consistent finding’ shows that I did not coach them on what to say nor were they ‘punished’ by me for whatever they said! They feel they can be honest without fearing retribution from me! If he took good care, I wouldn’t ask? If he’d taken some of my suggestions instead of sabotaging care or if he would’ve talked to me and really listened and learned and changed, then I wouldn’t have had to ask anybody else, let alone, the kids. But I said ‘had had’ an ‘estranged relationship’ and that IT WAS IMPROVING OVER TIME! THAT’S what I really had told her!”
Last page’s not‑so‑musical notes from the margin! Even a couple to myself, “Legion, beware. If he says he will go to counseling or parenting classes, he’ll say and even go but then not follow through with actually living differently with the Boys or continue with consistency. Why? Because I was the ‘bad’ guy—the one who, before, always disciplined the Boys, not him, never him. I’ve attended to all of the mundane, ordinary situations so he’s had no ‘difficulties’ to deal with! VAGUE, VAGUE, VAGUE here! There were more she didn’t take the time to hear! So his are NOT IN CONTROL IN FRONT of the Boys either, eg, 01 April 1989!” One last note about the violent aggression from Herry’s passivity, “If becoming AWARE is completely and vigorously DENIED as even being necessary, then how the hell will he take any ACTION? Let alone, REALLY change. He’s PASSIVE, remember??? Legion, Legion, in the face of CONFLICT, just stay honest and be consistent!”
My final note is the favorite, “Where the hell is word one about the specifics and details of i) ‘the children were asked to discuss things that they like and things that they don’t like about their current family situation’ and ii) ‘each child’s desired outcome of the court proceedings’?” Mother‑fuckingly classic, I fear. I do. For other mothers and children who have gone through this ‘routine’, or will, I soooo fear.
Ms. Canard’s Report was dated 28 March 1989, marked as “Re: Zane, Jesse and Mirzah Truemaier,” addressed to the Storm County Court’s “Presiding Judge” and signed off on as “Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or need additional information. Sincerely, Carrie Canard, Ph.D., Psychologist.” Not including the cutesy billing segment the five‑page, single‑lined Report was divided into four more, the last and conclusions’ segment the most watched, of course: Procedure, Background Information, Current Assessment and Summary and Recommendations.
It is clear how I believe that The Opera’s starring tenor’s solo appearances––Herry’s in his folie à deux with Ms. Cherry Evaluator––beguiled its end.
To begin, “The purpose of this evaluation was to determine which parent could provide primary living arrangements that best meet the children’s emotional, social and physical needs. This was done according to standard procedures using interviews, observations, and psychological test data. The parties were cooperative in this evaluation. In my opinion, the results reported here represent a valid assessment of these individuals.
The interviews were conducted in order to obtain information about the nature of the relationships among the adults, their feelings about the current custody/visitation arrangement, and each person’s desired outcome of the court proceedings. The interviews asked each parent to talk about the children and about the relationships among the children and the adults. The interviews also asked about activities and plans for the children. Interviews of the children focused on each child’s desired outcome of the court proceedings. The children were asked to discuss things that they like and things that they don’t like about their current family situation.
The purpose of the observations was to assess one important aspect of the relationship between the children and their caregivers, their play. Though brief, these observations provided important information about how these individuals relate to each other in an unstructured situation that is at the child’s level.
The paper and pencil assessment measure served to round up personality profiles of the adults. The MMPI is a widely used inventory that gives information about several aspects of personality.”
The second section on background read, “Legion True and Herod Edinsmaier met in 1974 when they were pursing advanced degrees at Iowa State University. They married two years later when Dr. True became pregnant with their first child. After Zane’s birth in 1976, the family moved to Iowa City where Dr. Edinsmaier completed medical school and Dr. True worked as a veterinarian in a nearby town. Two more children were born in this period, Jesse in 1978 and Mirzah in 1979. Subsequently, the family moved to Hershey, Pennsylvania and then to Columbia, Missouri, where Dr. Edinsmaier was completing his residency training and Dr. True was working on her doctorate. Before their return to Iowa, the family lived for a brief time in Manhattan, Kansas, where Dr. True completed her training. Currently, she is not employed outside the home. Dr. Edinsmaier is working as a pathologist at the Downshim Lab in Ames.
This couple separated in June 1988, at the request of Dr. True. She felt that a separation was necessary in order to preserve the marriage, which was highly conflictual and stressful. According to both parties, their relationship was conflictual throughout their marriage. Among the stressors cited by each party were intense competition, alcoholism and codependency issues, and a tendency to place the children in the middle of their conflicts with each other.
Dr. Edinsmaier filed for divorce in October, 1988. Dr. True has experienced the past five months as extremely traumatic and emotionally distressing. She has expended a great deal of energy in her effort to understand the problems encountered in her marriage and the forces that led to its dissolution. She expresses anger and confusion, as well as regret, that the couple’s attempt at marital counseling was not fruitful. Dr. Edinsmaier, on the other hand, seems to feel that the divorce is potentially beneficial for the adults as well as the children. All parties agree, however, that the conflict and hostility so openly expressed during their marriage have not subsided since the separation.”
That’s it. That was it for background. Ms. Cherry moved right into assessing!
“This section will address the topics outlined in ‘Child Report, Exhibit A;’, that was attached to the court order. Dr. True expressed several concerns about these issues, which include basic care of the children when visiting their father. For example, she noted that the yard near Dr. Edinsmaier’s apartment is contaminated with dog feces, and she feels that this poses a health hazard to the children. Dr. True also expressed concern about Dr. Edinsmaier’s tendency to leave his apartment door unlocked from time to time because she feels that this creates an unsafe environment for the children. In addition, Dr. True is concerned about the boys’ eating habits when in the care of their father. She worries that they may not get balanced meals there. Dr. Edinsmaier acknowledges that his meal planning and preparation are more ‘casual’ then that of his exwife, with less attention to nutritional requirements then Dr. True pays. [Canard’s two uses of ‘then’ …]
In the category of childcare arrangements, Dr. True is concerned about Dr. Edinsmaier’s choice of sitters for the boys because she feels that ‘13 to 25 year olds’ have no idea of nurturing skills.’ She acknowledges that poor choices of daycare providers in the past were made by both parents. But she feels that she has learned from those mistakes, and she doubts that her ex-husband has.
Both parents expressed concern about Zane’s progress in school and recent increase in behavior problems. And their styles of intervention are markedly different. Dr. True places great value on a high degree of structure in setting and enforcing limits for the children. She favors a behavior modification program for reinforcing desirable behaviors and decreasing undesirable ones. Dr. Edinsmaier, on the other hand, describes his style as one that values ‘affection and security’ over discipline, especially physical forms of punishment. He is more likely to let misbehaviors go unpunished or to respond by talking to the boys about the problem. He acknowledges that he would like the boys, especially Zane, to behave more responsibly but does not seem to have given much thought to how to facilitate this.
Neither parent expresses any concern about the children’s health, religious training, leisure time, or the use of child support payments.
Moving beyond the scope of the topics covered above, each parent demonstrated strengths in his/her relationships with the children. Dr. Edinsmaier is highly sensitive to the issue of parent‑child boundaries and seems to make an effort to keep the boys in the role of children and to exclude them as much as possible from parental conflict and stress. Dr. True is most interested in attending to the task of providing structure and consistent limits, even when this makes her unpopular with the children. In the process, she focuses on the daily details of the children’s lives, including whether or not they’ve completed homework, drunk enough milk, etc., both parents appear to be genuinely interested in their boys as uniques [hers] individuals worthy of respect. Both have demonstrated a readiness to alter their routines in order to meet their children’s needs.
The interviews and test results of Dr. Edinsmaier yield a picture of a fairly passive individual who does not experience much emotional distress at the present time. He tends to be rather indulgent of himself and his children and lacks insight about how this affects others. Dr. Edinsmaier appears to be a very self‑confident and socially adept man. He is rather defensive about any deficiencies that he has. Such personality characteristics can create problems for him as a parent when his sons perceive him as a person who is permissive and easy to manipulate, as they clearly do. He may identify with their misbehaviors, especially their conficts [her spelling, er, misspelling, too] with authority figures, and fail to adequately intervene to correct them.
Dr. True is a very emotionally reactive person who has intense needs for affection and attention. She often expresses her dependency needs in ways that alienate others, for example, by voicing intense hostility and anger toward other people. When her affections and need for attention are not met, she may experience chronic feelings of resentment and bitterness. Yet her strong defenses, such as rationalization and intellectualization, prevent her from seeing her own role in the relationship difficulties. As a result, she projects the blame for the problems onto the other person.
Dr. True has made a serious effort to understand what has transpired in her marriage, and her quest for personal growth and insight may yield benefits for herself and for her relationship with her children. She appears to be a person who is quite open to suggestions and willing to seek help for solving her problems. Nevertheless, it is of grave concern to this examiner that Dr. True’s emotional reactivity and unhealthy coping strategies are jeopardizing her relationship with her children.
For example, the most consistent finding from the interviews with the boys was their intense dislike of their mother’s hostile remarks about their father and her attempts to obtain information from them about their contacts with him. They perceive their mother as a very angry person who takes her anger out on them by demeaning their father, his acquaintences [hers, again] and friends, and men in general. They feel that their mother is frequently difficult to talk to because of her persistent efforts to gain information and her negative remarks. It is important to note that each child seems to have difficulty distinguishing their mother’s anger at their father from anger at them. They feel her verbal attacks and name calling of their father as personal affronts, and this perception has already damaged their relationship with her. Dr. True seems to be aware of this and feels that she and her children may have an ‘estranged’ relationship. Unfortunately, even Dr. True’s assets as a parent, her ability to structure the boys’ routines and her attention to their physical needs, are carried too far when she demands to know about the details of their lives when they are with their father.
Another consistent finding from the interviews with Mirzah, Zane and Jesse was their understanding that they can get away with more misbehavior when with their father than with their mother. It seems that Dr. Edinsmaier’s strong desire to be liked by his sons and to avoid conflict with them is interfering with their perception of him as an effective parent. While this may not have presented major difficulties in his relationships with the boys yet, it is only a matter of time before they lose more respect for him and he ceases to be a role model for them. Dr. Edinsmaier’s lack of insight regarding this issue may prevent him from making changes in his parenting style necessary to promote healthier parent‑child relationships. However, his participation in Alcoholics Anonymous suggests that he is capable of seeking appropriate help once he recognizes a problem.”
So, with Ms. Canard’s educated and experienced reckoning and so seasoned judging skills that “they can get away with more misbehavior when with their father than with their mother” and “Dr. Edinsmaier’s strong desire to be liked by his sons and to avoid conflict with them is interfering with their perception of him as an effective parent” and that “while this may not have presented major difficulties in his relationships with the boys yet, it is only a matter of time before they lose more respect for him and he ceases to be a role model for them” and “Dr. Edinsmaier’s lack of insight regarding this issue may prevent him from making changes in his parenting style necessary to promote healthier parent‑child relationships,” charmed little Miss Cherry proceeds immediately to up and forget about her mother‑fucking studies! In quite subservient deference by her, the soooo, so male‑identified female, to daMan’s, of course, ancient rite of favor and right to ownership of … absolutely everything.
Her violently vexatious and stupid ending then, “As described above, this evaluation found Dr. True and Edinsmaier to have a number of unique strengths as parents and some serious deficiencies, as well. If [Canard’s gaffe … again!] is the opinion of this examiner that the specific concerns expressed by Dr. True about her exhusband’s residence, his supervision of the boys’ diets, and other concerns are examples of an overall disapproval of his current lifestyle and do not constitute major lapses in parenting. Of far greater concern are the potential negative effects on the children of Dr. Edinsmaier’s lack of consistently set and enforced limits and Dr. True’s hostile expressions about their father. Weighing these relative strengths and weaknesses is most difficult. However, at this time, the greatest threat to the boys’ emotional well being is the almost constant exposure to their mother’s intense neediness, demandingness, [not my word!] and negativity. It is likely that, in her emotional dependency on them, Dr. True has inadvertently pressured the boys and alienated them to some extent as well.
It is the opinion of this examiner that it is in the immediate best interest of these children to be placed in the physical custody of their father. While joint custody is desirable, it is highly unlikely that these two adults will be able to effectively coparent their sons without considerable effort by both parties to reduce the destructive competition in their relationship as parents and to keep their feelings about each other under control. Should Dr. True make improvements in her ability to do this, then her parenting ability would deserve further consideration. Likewise, should Dr. Edinsmaier be unable to improve the structure and consistency in his parenting, then this recommendation might be reconsidered.
In order for each parent to meet the long term emotional needs of these children, much work remains to be done in terms of counseling and parenting skills enhancement. It is hoped that this evaluation will serve to help these individuals identify problem areas and to work on their resolution.” The End.
The end? O no. Miss Cherry, with her arrested, middle school‑aged underdevelopment, did not fade away. O no. Juggern’s Seventh Sourced Sperm—Herry—wasn’t done warbling out his wiles onto her so male‑identified persona just yet. It is the long‑, long‑studied and not‑so‑stupid‑anyfuckingmore opinion of Dr. True’s here that Dr. Edinsmaier was, … that Herry is, … the needy, self‑centered, narcissistic, passively very aggressive and utterly undisciplined, entitled thug, a teenaged actor with the very same arrested adolescent, attention‑hogging non‑development who was about to waaaah, waaaah, waaaah whine his way into workin’ it, workin’ it, workin’ it … again … any which way possible. Just so long as in the end––it all came out … his way.
CAST OF CHARACTERS
Dr. Legion True: One Fucked Mother
Dr. Herod (Herry) Edinsmaier: Legion’s husband/Sperm Source [“re: I am snide” backwards]
Zane Truemaier: Legion’s son
Jesse Truemaier: Legion’s son
Mirzah Truemaier: Legion’s son
AmTaham True: Legion’s father [Mahatma backwards]
Mehitable True: Legion’s mother [Me hit-able—i.e. she was abusive]
Ardys and Endys: Legion’s sisters [names backwards]
Sterling: Legion’s brother [her mother’s planned name of next son (who never came)]
Mi Sprision O'Revinnoco: Herry’s sister [misprision: concealing knowledge of treason/O'Revinnoco = O'Connivero backwards]
Juggern Aut Misein Edinsmaier: Legion’s father-in-law [juggernaut; aut = 0; misein = “to hate (misogyny)”]
Detanimod Edinsmaier: Legion’s mother-in-law [dominated backwards]
Ava Saffron True and Zebulon True: respectively, Legion's paternal grandmother and her husband, Legion's paternal grandfather
Rowland and Wyman Natures: respectively, Legion's most favored uncle and most favored male first cousin
Fannie Issicran McLive: fawning enabler of ex [narcissi(st) and Mc(Evil) backwards]
Legion’s Friends: Margaret, Mona, Yanira, Stormy, Lynda, László, Jane, Kincaid, Joseph, Sheryl
Legion’s Best Friends: Ms Grace and Dr Lionel Portia and Rachel
Wende: = Legion's friend after divorce [committed suicide due to Custody Crisis]
Jim Cornball: Herry’s acquaintance from AA and realtor
Loser Lorn: Insurance agent referred by Cornball
Judge Harley Butcher: Family Court judge
Judge Sol Wacotler Seizor: Family Court judge
Judge Barry Crowrook: Appellate Court judge
Judge Pansy Shawshank: Appellate Court judge
Jazzy Jinx: Legion’s Family Court lawyer who sold her out
Shindy Scheisser: Herry’s lawyer [shindy = noisy; scheisser = German for shithead]
Li Zhang: Herry’s Aussie affair
Dr Freddie Goldstein & Ella: Herry’s colleague and wife
Mick: = Herry's acquaintance from high school; best man [not in Herry’s life after that as he had no true friends]
Varry Wussamai: Herry's AA sponsor (not a real friend) [I am a wuss backwards]
David Humes: nursing student; classmate of Legion's, y1968 - y1971, New York City
Edmund Silver: Legion's boyfriend pre-Herry
Braemore St: where Legion and her family lived, y1983 - y1986
Havencourt condominium: Legion's Ames apartment; after separation
Zephyr: tabby cat of Zane's, Mirzah's, Jesse's [pronounced “Zay – fear”]
Rex: Jesse’s pet Eastern Florida Kingsnake, female
Lady: Zane's pet Zebra Finch, female
Madonna: realtor
Larry Brouhaha: court-mandated marriage counselor
Carlotta Klutz: Legion’s Family Court attorney
Judge Sol Wacotler Seizor: District Court judge on first two trials
Judge Harley Butcher: District Court judge for third trial
Dr. Shark: Herry’s residency supervisor who fired him
Carrie Canard: twice judge-mandated custody evaluator
AUTHOR: Dr. Blue, aka Ofherod, BSN, DVM, PhD = Commander Edinsmaier's Handmaid (Commander reiamsnidE's Handmaid)
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 and thanks to everyone who has subscribed!