A topic for conversation. Parental alienation

[Family Court Strategies: When Your Partner Has BPD OR NPD Traits.]

I’m currently researching parental rights. My gut is telling me that I’m on the forefront of a serious attempt of parental alienation by my Son’s mother. However, this discussion isn’t meant to vent. It’s more about the business end of things.

Traditionally (1950’s America), the stereotypical family consisted of a male bread winner and a female that took care of things at home. Please don’t be offended, I’m simply stating what I know about a time before I was born. With that being said, the family courts of the day, more so in the 60’s, adopted what is called the “Tender Years Doctrine” which implies that the welfare of the child is best while in the primary care of the mother. This makes sense considering what the status quo and societal norm was back then.

Dynamics are much different today, but much of the family court system still defaults to the “Tender Years Doctrine”. The courts have not evolved with society, IMHO.

Another crippling factor is the financial burden of family court. It’s absurd with how much money is drained from people that simply want to be a parent. Absurd. There is a documentary titled “Divorce Corp.” I’ll try to leave a link at the end of this post.

I’m trying to pinpoint how imbalanced the family court system can be. How gender biased it can be without real facts either through mediation or litigation. How it bankrupts people. How the Constitution is removed from the “legal” process of family court.

There is some awareness and some very good advocates that are trying to improve the system, but it simply isn’t happening fast enough. I say that from a biased POV. With all of this social justice, reforms being demanded, etc. Why haven’t we figured out a court system that adapts to the evolution of the human condition? I think that, in some aspects, we are being ruled and controlled by outdated laws and doctrines. I think the anger that is currently being broadcast is proof.

[JNChell]

I’m currently researching parental rights. My gut is telling me that I’m on the forefront of a serious attempt of parental alienation by my Son’s mother. However, this discussion isn’t meant to vent. It’s more about the business end of things.

Traditionally (1950’s America), the stereotypical family consisted of a male bread winner and a female that took care of things at home. Please don’t be offended, I’m simply stating what I know about a time before I was born. With that being said, the family courts of the day, more so in the 60’s, adopted what is called the “Tender Years Doctrine” which implies that the welfare of the child is best while in the primary care of the mother. This makes sense considering what the status quo and societal norm was back then.

Dynamics are much different today, but much of the family court system still defaults to the “Tender Years Doctrine”. The courts have not evolved with society, IMHO.

Another crippling factor is the financial burden of family court. It’s absurd with how much money is drained from people that simply want to be a parent. Absurd. There is a documentary titled “Divorce Corp.” I’ll try to leave a link at the end of this post.

I’m trying to pinpoint how imbalanced the family court system can be. How gender biased it can be without real facts either through mediation or litigation. How it bankrupts people. How the Constitution is removed from the “legal” process of family court.

There is some awareness and some very good advocates that are trying to improve the system, but it simply isn’t happening fast enough. I say that from a biased POV. With all of this social justice, reforms being demanded, etc. Why haven’t we figured out a court system that adapts to the evolution of the human condition? I think that, in some aspects, we are being ruled and controlled by outdated laws and doctrines. I think the anger that is currently being broadcast is proof.

[defogging]

I can only speak for my jurisdiction, but what I found was that the times have changed to support both the father and mother.  Unless there is some sort of provable abuse or mental instability, the courts here default to 50/50 decision making and 50/50 parenting time.

That's all great, but I think there are still failures in the system.  In a PD or any high conflict situation it is next to impossible to get any help to minimize the effects of alienation.  Therapists don't want to get involved in court battles, and courts don't recognize the subtle patterns of manipulation.  The result is the "Non PD" parent is forced to navigate this on their own by becoming educated on the subject and dealing with it behind the scenes.

It's both good and bad.  The bad part is my exPDw is very skilled at manipulating behind the scenes and makes it difficult for me to prove anything.  However, the good part is that since my exPDw has no evidence of me being unstable (because I'm not), any baseless claims she made never gained any traction with the courts.

[JNChell]

Obviously don’t give away your location. Are you in the States? Scandinavia has a great approach. They don’t incentivize it. Basically, it costs a hundred bucks. There is no reward for “winning” in court. It’s simply not set up that way. Children, for the most part, are agreed upon by both parents.

[scraps66]

I can only speak for my jurisdiction, but what I found was that the times have changed to support both the father and mother.  Unless there is some sort of provable abuse or mental instability, the courts here default to 50/50 decision making and 50/50 parenting time.

Judges and Masters, not having the correct training or tools to evaluate family situations, love to invoke certain rationalizations to arrive at decisions.  Like 50/50 custody.  My court has progressed to the default 50/50 arrangement.  My attorney had told me that's fine, but in many cases the better arrangement may be Dad having more time than mom and maybe all of the decision making authority.  Essentially that the default 50/50 is a reflection of how screwed up the system is.

Another one, "well sir, since you were the one that filed for the divorce, you should be the one to give up the house, move out and find alternate living arrangements while mother stays in the house."

Same follows for equitable distribution.  I dumped about $80k into my fraudulent marriage while while my ex for all intents and purposes contributed nothing other than an egg.  The Master worked very hard, for 19 months in fact, to arrive at a nearly 50/50 split right down the middle.  Doing this he overlooked nearly all of the criteria for determining equitable distribution.

These defaults are meant to limit the possibility of appeal as well which could shine a light on a judge or master.     

[JNChell]

Hey scraps66. This sounds a lot like the “Tender Years Doctrine”. The court getting paid and not giving a  about the outcome.

You know, there is conversation about defunding police forces and sending mental health practitioners as a first line of defense. Whatever. Not much surprises me these days. What about mental health practitioners in family court? Not at a cost of $5000, but readily available. Paid for by our taxes. Or, in a better society, there should be no incentive to split up. No rewards to simply say it didn’t work out.

[MeandThee29]

Yes, 50/50 is very much the norm here. Sometimes it slides a little, but my attorney said that the judges rarely waiver from that because they don't want appeals. The only reason they don't do that is if there is documented jail time, addiction, or mental health hospitalizations.

Same with the financial settlement part -- nearly always 50/50 as long as both partners can semi-support themselves. And they strictly follow the guidance for child support and alimony unless there is something significant brought out.

So the incentive for going to court isn't there unless you truly cannot get it settled between yourselves. Some with disordered spouses accept the 50/50 to get the divorce done, and then meticulously document until they can go back for a custody agreement with the judge that is better for the child(ren).

[MeandThee29]

I'll add that I live in an expensive metropolitan area where I high percentage of women are already working when the divorce is underway.

[JNChell]

MeandThee29. Thanks for that. It’s nice to know that there are states that are really looking out for the kids, and parents. All involved should be considered. However, good policies are constrained by state lines. My state favors mom. I’m curious, what is the political majority where you live? I’m not asking you for your beliefs or where you live. I’m just curious as to why there are these differences in Family Courts across the nation, and I believe that political affiliations can help to determine directions and outcomes.

[AnuDay]

1. The key word here is "incentive".
Prior to the 60s there was no incentive for women to file for divorce because they could not find jobs in the US. 

2. A woman can file for divorce now and pretty much count on either the judge or the welfare system to ensure that she and the kids are taken care of by either the father or the state. 
Also, the man is pretty much guilty from the moment he steps into the court room absent some strong and compelling evidence. 

3. With so much power in the woman's hands she can alienate the father and easily get away with it. 

4. American society really does not like punishing women, especially mothers.   

[l8kgrl]

I agree with a lot of what AnuDay said, except maybe #2 (being taken care of by the state or father). Most women end up a lot worse off financially after divorce, although initially men often take a hit.

JNChell, I agree that this is a huge problem for our time. Not many states have changed to create an automatic presumption of 50/50. I think maybe 2-3 have? It is changing but not fast enough.

That said, there are many jurisdictions where it's MUCH easier to get 50/50. These tend to be more urban, liberal areas where the attitude is that fathers are equally involved and important. I am in a major metro area, and it matters what county you're in in terms of the courts' attitudes (the more suburban areas are more conservative, favoring the mother - the urban courts are more liberal, favoring 50/50).

My understanding is that the biggest obstacle to moving this forward has been advocacy by attorneys, who stand to lose a LOT of money if not everyone is having to go to court to argue for who's the better parent. It's a really, really sad state of affairs, really for everyone, but particularly for fathers and their kids.

I do think there are also huge problems with regards to abuse, whether it's someone with PD or not. It's SO hard hard to document or prove that someone is abusive, whether it's the father or mother. My sense (not sure if this is true) is that it often comes down to who has more money to spend in court. There are absolutely lots of cases of women claiming dads suck and shouldn't be with their kids and that's terrible. There are also way too many cases where a physically or sexually abusive parent (often a father) still gets parenting time bc he has more resources to pay for legal fees.

It's all really messed up. I'm in favor of 50/50 (without reason not to). I'm not sure what you do about the part of proving who is an unfit parent, though, bc as we all know, some people are amazing actors and manipulators. I don't know how court officials or even mental health professionals in the system can get it right in making these determinations.

I'm sorry this is something you're up against. I can only imagine how maddening it must be.

[Radcliff]

Have you read, Don't Alienate the Kids, by Bill Eddy?

RC

[Turkish]

Most women end up a lot worse off financially after divorce, although initially men often take a hit.

That's what my T said, and in our case it turned out to be true.

In our case also, my ex ended up being the Provider for the guy she left me for and married (then divorced last year), and she's also an impulsive spender.

[MeandThee29]

MeandThee29. Thanks for that. It’s nice to know that there are states that are really looking out for the kids, and parents. All involved should be considered. However, good policies are constrained by state lines. My state favors mom. I’m curious, what is the political majority where you live? I’m not asking you for your beliefs or where you live. I’m just curious as to why there are these differences in Family Courts across the nation, and I believe that political affiliations can help to determine directions and outcomes.

My area is more left-leaning. I think that's indeed a marker.

I didn't have custody issues, but I did a lot of research before picking an attorney and still attend a divorce support group. And nearly everyone with kids that I've talked to has 50/50.

In my own case,  there were other things that came up related to the twenty years that I was a SAHM. The state law talks about "non-monetary contributions" as being a factor in how things are divided, but my attorney told me in the first appointment that the judges in our region ignore that entirely. I would be treated the same as a woman who had worked full-time the whole way. He said that there was one judge that would take that into account, but at that point that judge was retiring. If we got a date for a trial, of course we might or might not even get him in the end.

So my SAHM years counted for nothing in the negotiated settlement. During separation, I made so little that I paid no taxes, so I lived "women who end up worse." Ouch.

Thankfully, my finances are fine now, but not because of what I got from the divorce.

[JNChell]

I8K, there are attorneys that are trying to help with this. They’re starting to get more involved with therapists. Attorneys are starting to see a trend in what they have to sit in front of. There are attorneys that are trying to push this. At least attorneys that were able to keep the humanitarian parts of themselves, or realized that they’ve had the same experience.

Psychology needs to be involved in Family Court. The Constitution is removed, so, philosophy needs to be there. The Constitution is philosophy, but isn’t allowed in Family Court. Philosophy allows.

[JNChell]

I’ve not read “Don’t alienate the kids”. I’ve watched several videos. He knows. I feel like I’ve reacted and behaved too badly. I can admit it here. I’m pissed off. I’ve sent the text messages. The long and drawn out stories of what she did. I started saving them to my email tonight. I typed more than her. At the end of the day, I lay down and cry about my son. I’m afraid of court because it’s lopsided and I’ve said a lot of unnecessary things to his mom. At the same time, I would never do this to him.

I’m sending him care packages with messages that I hope his mom is reading to him.

[I Am Redeemed]

I’m afraid of court because it’s lopsided and I’ve said a lot of unnecessary things to his mom. At the same time, I would never do this to him.

I’m sending him care packages with messages that I hope his mom is reading to him.

Do you think the outcome of court will be worse than what you are going through now?

[JNChell]

No. I just left a voicemail with a lawyer. I asked my best friend what to do and he said what you said.

[JNChell]

My stomach feels really tight and my eyes wont stop gushing. My nose is running snot. Ah PLEASE READ it. It’s part of letting go. Sound about right?

[JNChell]

I called for real.

[I Am Redeemed]

No. I just left a voicemail with a lawyer. I asked my best friend what to do and he said what you said.

Good for you, JNChell. I know this is scary. But listen to me- you're a good dad. You deserve access to your son, and the best shot you have of making that happen is with a court order.

You may not get the arrangement you want, but something is better than nothing, which is what you have now and is what you can expect if your time with your son is totally in her control.

Some of us who have experienced severe trauma tend to expect the worst outcome possible in any given situation, and the human brain in general tends to have a negative bias. It's a leftover survival mechanism from ages ago, when not being on high alert might have gotten you killed and eaten by a wild animal. That negative bias doesn't serve the same purpose anymore, but it is still activated in us and so we worry or become anxious about the outcome of things that are important to us.

I think you may become more confident after you talk with a lawyer (or a couple of them) and find out the reality of what you can expect. Right now you're turning over scenarios in your head and getting worked up about what hasn't even happened yet. Asking questions and getting more realistically prepared might stop some of that catastrophizing.

[kells76]

I notice you noticing how your body is feeling as you start to involve a lawyer. I often need a reminder to "be/stay in my body"; a lot of the time I just am in "get sh!t done" mode and am disconnected. Allow yourself to give yourself a pat on the back for noticing how your body is feeling and thinking about what it may be telling you.

Getting L's involved can be high stress. I sometimes have a big reaction to situations where it's been mandated that I do something; I have no choice. Not sure if you get that too. If so, consider if you want to remind yourself that any L works for you and will not "make" you do anything. You can go and meet and learn information, and let yourself have the benefit of info, and give yourself time to think Hmmm, ok, what do I want to do with this info?

Big stuff; here for you as you try this new direction.

P.S. Also consider if it'd be helpful to "give yourself a break" from being in your body; ie I can easily picture myself beating myself up" for "doing a bad job" at noticing how my body feels.

[JNChell]

IAR, I’d be happy with anything at this point in time. She’s angry because I’ve called her on her stuff. I have a problem with keeping my mouth shut. Truth doesn’t always pay off. I’ve read through a lot tonight. It all goes back to S5.  For me. I don’t mean that selfishly. It’s realistic. I hope that you’re feeling well on your end. I don’t know what else to say but I should say something. I hope you’re feeling ok.

[JNChell]

kells76, I’m pretty uptight. I’ll do what I have to do. My Son.
Sorry about the lower case L. Feel like getting back to music?

[ForeverDad]

My nose is running snot.

For years during and after my divorce I would have days-long episode of runny sinuses.  Eventually I learned it wasn't a cold because only one sinus was draining, though sometimes as one dried up the other side would start.

I consulted a practitioner of EMDR or body balancing.  A lot is rooted from early childhood issues, but recently triggered.  For men, left side (most common for me) meant emotional problems from others, right side was my own emotional issues.

My kid is grown now, he aged out of the order so it's rare today.  I know when it starts because I'd often wake up in the middle of the night with a sharp zing in a sinus and immediate drainage that just wouldn't stop.

This may not be what you're experiencing but I shared how the stress impacted me.

[kells76]

Interesting stuff, I never thought about it before. DH has stuffy nose/snoring/allergy/sinus issues, too. LOTS of childhood trauma, and as an adult the stresses of dealing with his kids' mom.

[JNChell]

FD, thanks, but it was from crying. Just didn’t want to say it and left it up for interpretation. I think that will subside as well.

[kells76]

That's real stuff. Two of the few times I've seen DH cry were over the girls.
You really miss your little guy.

[JNChell]

I really do. I wonder how he’s doing. I sent his second care package today. Which I’m documenting. It included a slappy hand, Styro sludge, Welch’s fruit snacks, 1 mini Hershey bar, 1 Quaker Oats baked square, 1 small pack of watermelon gum and 1 Kinder Egg. He loves those eggs. Also a card with a message. Hopefully it gets read to him.

[kells76]

I sent his second care package today. Which I’m documenting.

Really good move. It's caring about him in an immediate, tangible way, and also caring about him by starting to document all these ways you're trying to be there for him. 

[JNChell]

I gotta let him know that I’m still here.