Discrimination against Women in Family Court Lawsuit: Update

And: SIS Forum this Saturday!

As many of you know, The Women’s Coalition has had a Discrimination against Women in Family Court lawsuit in the works for a while.

Originally, the plan was to file a class action lawsuit consisting of representatives and members. Over 1200 mothers in the U.S. alone signed up for it.

However, after consulting with attorneys, the suit has been revised to a civil rights lawsuit with similarly-situated plaintiffs. That means all mothers who’ve signed up to be representatives, as well as members, can now be plaintiffs.

Also, the lawsuit was originally going to be filed first in California and later in other states. But now it is open to being filed in any state where there is a civil rights attorney (or attorney comfortable with civil rights law) willing to take it.

Since the U.S. deems custody cases to be under state jurisdiction, the suits must be filed state by state. But that’s fine, because we can get local media on them. One benefit of filing these lawsuits is it will help the public see and understand the terrible injustices being inflicted on so many women in family courts and then support our efforts for a new system.

The good news is we already have a draft lawsuit ready to go, so attorneys in every state will have something to work with. And after the first suit is filed, it will be much easier for others.

Since there have been no attorneys who’ve offered to take the lawsuit pro bono yet, we are now raising funds for it. We’ve just started a Gofundme for that purpose.

Please consider donating. The more we get, the more states we will be able to file in. And the more states we file in, the more support we will have for our cause of ending the Custody Crisis.

We presently have leads in Massachusetts, New York, and California. Please ask around in your state for attorneys willing to take on this unprecedented and crucial civil rights lawsuit.

THE LAWSUIT

Plaintiffs make the claims that women’s state and federal rights to equal protection, procedural due process, and substantive due process are being routinely and systemically violated in family courts. Defendants are judges of the state’s trial court who preside over family court matters, collectively.

Declaratory relief is requested stating that women have a right to equal protection and due process in custody cases and that those rights are being systemically violated in Family Court because they are women.

Other relief requested is injunctive: that Family Court judges reinstate plaintiffs’ custody and visitation and/or permit a de novo (brand new) proceeding.

Lawsuits will be filed in federal district courts. A jury will be demanded.

DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT

The complaint includes a list of types of discriminatory conduct routinely committed by judges. Each plaintiff will identify the ones that apply in her case (easy to check off in the form to join the lawsuit).

a. Denying women a hearing or allowing them only a perfunctory hearing in matters where women’s fundamental rights, liberty interests and other protected rights were at stake.

b. Giving temporary custody to men pending trial when a nondiscriminatory application of the law would have resulted in temporary custody being granted to women.

c. Appointing custody/parenting evaluators who demonstrated bias against women and favored men.

d. Appointing minor’s counsels or guardians ad litem [GAL’s] to represent children who demonstrated bias against women and favored men.

e. Accepting reports from custody evaluators and minor’s counsels/guardians ad litem that discriminated against women and favored men, and allowing them to influence judicial decisions.

f. Ordering women to submit to mental health evaluations while not ordering men to submit to mental health evaluations, based on the same quality and quantity of evidence.

g. Adjudicating matters in a sex discriminatory manner by favoring men even when evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated that men should not have been favored.

h. Discrediting women despite much evidence supporting they were telling the truth and/or little evidence they were lying; while crediting men despite little evidence supporting they were telling the truth and/or much evidence they were lying.

i. Minimizing and denying credible evidence and reports by women of a man’s abuse or poor parenting; while crediting non-credible evidence and reports by men of a woman’s abuse or poor parenting.

j. Making findings women were alienating children from men when alienation was not occurring; and/or not finding men were alienating children from women when alienation was occurring.

k. Disregarding the legal requirement that courts prioritize the best interests of children in a manner that favored men over women in custody and visitation rulings.

l. Ordering reunification of children with men were credibly accused of abuse; and not ordering reunification of children with women who were not credibly accused of abuse.

m. Ordering supervised visitation for women without credible evidence they were a danger to the children; and not ordering supervised visitation for men when there was credible evidence they are a danger to the children.

n. Threatening women, but not men, with loss of custody if they objected to the court’s position or orders.

o. Threatening women, but not men, with loss of custody if they continued to litigate for custody of, or visitation with, their children.

p. Issuing orders sealing records that favor women, while not issuing orders sealing records that favor men, based on a similar quality and quantity of evidence.

q. Issuing gag orders against women who spoke out or wanted to speak out, while not issuing similar gag orders against men.

r. Holding women in contempt and/or jailing them for exercising their First Amendment right to free speech; while not holding men in contempt or jailing them for similar behavior.

s. Holding women in contempt and/or jailing them for withholding visitation when they had a good reason, such as to protect children; while not holding men in contempt or jailing them for withholding visitation when they did not have a good reason for doing so.

JOINING THE LAWSUIT

If you’d like to join the lawsuit, please fill out this form.

If you have previously joined the lawsuit, it would be best if you would still fill out this new form as it has the list of discriminatory actions you can simply check off. Otherwise, you can email that info separately and we will add it to your submission.

If your custody case is closed, it doesn’t matter how long ago it was heard, you may still join. The statute of limitations usually requires only some cases to be current. Since the discrimination has been ongoing, old cases are allowed.

If you have a problem with filling out the form, you can email your information to womenscoalitionintl@gmail.com. Include your name, county, state and dates of your case, along with which discriminatory acts were involved. Subject: join lawsuit

TAKEAWAYS

The primary purpose of this lawsuit is to officially establish that there is, in fact, systemic discrimination against women in family courts.

Another important reason for the lawsuit is that it is a precursor to demanding legislators implement the new system we are proposing. We are proposing that custody cases be heard in regular civil courts with the right to a jury. This is the only way to ensure equal protection and due process. [If you know anyone able to help with writing legislative code, plz contact us.]

The many women joining the lawsuit and identifying the actions taken against them makes clear there is a pattern that constitutes systemic discrimination. And that is true even if cases are dismissed. By coming together as women and making our lived experiences in an unjust court system known, we have the power to make a difference.

This lawsuit will benefit all women. Mothers everywhere can cite the lawsuit in court or to family and friends to validate the unbelievable injustice they’ve been subjected to in Family Court—no matter where their case is.

If a mother’s case is current, she may receive injunctive relief for custody/visitation to be returned, or be allowed a new proceeding. If her case is past, she will be helping to end the crisis for women who are presently affected and those who would find themselves in this nightmare in the future.

For mothers in other countries—we will hopefully be taking action internationally after some cases are established in the U.S. If you’d like to sign up ahead of time, plz fill out this form.

If you have questions about the lawsuit or are willing to help in your state, please join Sisters in Solidarity (our activist arm). See below for details.

Please support our efforts by joining the lawsuit and/or contributing to our gofundme. Even small donations add up!

---

IN OTHER NEWS

SISTERS IN SOLIDARITY

Our January Sisters in Solidarity forum will be this Saturday. We will be discussing the lawsuit and other activism issues.

Saturday, January 18th: 1pm Pacific; 4pm Eastern; 9pm London; 7am (19th) in Sydney.

If you’d like to join SIS, please fill out this form.

You will receive an invitation to the zoom a few days before [check alternate inboxes].

More info about SIS here.

---

NEXT SECTION OF CHAPTER 28 IS OUT!

In this next section of Chapter 28, Legion ponders how Herry could have been given total legal control of the boys. She bemoans how she is not even being allowed supervised visits, when judges commonly order visitation with abusive and criminal fathers, even when they are in prison, and even when they have murdered the mother. She warns women who are contemplating separation from the “sources of spermatozoa” that they have a good chance of becoming the “next mothers fucked”.

Legion also laments how there are so many “male-identified” women who will not support her or help her keep or protect her boys, including members of her own family and Herry’s, one of whom is a pediatrician. Worse, their attitude is that she should “just get over it”—as if a mother who’s had her children taken away and given to an abuser can just “move on” (perpetrator enabler mantra).

In the last section, Legion continues to meet with her boys clandestinely. She is angered about Herry and his new wife not giving them the many gifts she has sent and trying to make her “The Invisible Mother”. She is horrified when Mirzah later tells her he cannot remember anything about their lives before being taken away from her. Herry succeeded in his goal of erasing her—all her love and nurturing, as well as all the fun times together—from their minds and hearts.

CHAPTER 28 of Mother-Fucking: The Saga of One Fucked Mother begins with Act III, Part 4 of “The Opera” from Book 3. The Opera has three Acts with five Parts—one for each of the three Family Court and two Appellate Court trials. Chapter 28 covers all of Act III: Part 4: the third Family Court trial and Part 5: the second Appellate 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—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 so make sure to subscribe if you haven’t yet!

TEASERS

And to lose the children … over to the ex‑husband’s complete control––yet to actually be neither of those two conditions, crazy or criminal? Who the fuck ever did that?! Well, exponentially and rampantly so the family law courts do.

[E]ven murderers of their own children’s mothers get to have her kiddos brought to the slammer for visits with the dead woman’s babies and brought there by way of the murdered woman’s loved ones! ‘What measure of ultimate insult is this?’ I ask myself. And I answer me back, ‘The Standard Measure, Dr. True. The androcentric Standard Measure, Woman.’

‘If you are Not Males contemplating growing a child or separating yourselves physically, and in any or all other respects, from men who are the sources of spermatozoa which have fertilized your ova and developed subsequently the boy and DEhuman children whom you alone have, also, already chosen to grow, beware. Be ever so aware of your mighty fine chances at becoming the very next mothers fucked…’

---

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 Paypals Giving Fund.

All contributions are greatly appreciated & thanks to everyone who has subscribed!

---