 “For this court, the expert's [Linda Gottlieb] comment, at times, reached almost the apex of foolishness: she testified that a mother who tells her children that she misses them when they are gone is guilty of alienating conduct and manipulation. If so, every mother in the world needs reprogramming.” - NY Family Court Judge “We developed Kayden’s Law as a model for states to systematically improve how custody courts handle abuse evidence in contested custody cases. Too many children have been preventably harmed, and sometimes killed, by a parent due to the court’s failure to appropriately address and respond to family violence. Family courts are a place where opportunities routinely arise to halt intergenerational violence, to get it right, because often a red flag is being raised by someone, and instead of helping these protectors voicing concerns, courts are silencing them and sending their children back into harm’s way. It’s totally unnecessary and preventable.” - Danielle Pollack, Policy Manager, National Family Violence Law Center at GW  An Ohio mother has been gag ordered by family court Magistrate Helen Rowlands of Clinton County, prohibiting her from speaking about her case which involves allegations of child abuse by the father. Despite concerns raised about abrogating a parent’s first amendment rights, family court judges will sometimes issue gag orders in high-profile cases where the parties are well-known and media attention surrounds the case, as well as in cases where the parties are not public figures, as in this Ohio case.
This gag order was issued as a lawsuit was being prepared by the mother and her attorneys against the custody evaluator, Linda Gottlieb, LCSW, a much-criticized New York social worker and founder of Turning Points for Families (TPFF) “reunification” program. According to the mother’s lawsuit for deceptive practices, Linda Gottlieb “deceives consumers and the public, including the courts, into receiving, and paying for services to treat “Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS),” that are scientifically unproven." The Ohio magistrate in question had issued an order for Linda Gottlieb to remove the two children from their mother, the primary caretaker, who was accused of “alienating” the children and “reunify” them with the father. Such “alienation” claims are commonly put forward by alleged abusers in response to abuse claims in family court litigation as an explanation for why children resist or refuse contact with their allegedly abusive parent; this is an attempt to supplant the more obvious and likely reason the child resists or refuses contact when abuse has occurred - fear of the abusive parent. Gottlieb brands her program as a “Therapeutic Vacation for Healthy Children,” and TPFF “reprograms” the children to accept and “reunify” with their allegedly abusive parent. Gottlieb’s reunification program has been ordered by family court judges in many states when a parent accused of perpetrating family violence responds with a parental alienation claim. Central to obtaining such orders from courts, an “alienation expert” will generally first persuade the court that “reunification treatment” is necessary to “fix alienation” - citing faulty or extremely weak research put forward by “alienation” proponents. According to forensic psychiatrist Timothy Houchin, the operators of “reunification camps” often emphasize that these are not therapy programs but instead are “educational” in nature, which allows them to avoid the scrutiny of regulating bodies. Houchin and others have noted that these “educational” programs are a burgeoning industry that are making some professionals and lay people wealthy, despite lacking empirical support for their efficacy or safety and relying only on the claims of the people who run the programs and profit from them. The American Psychiatric Association Declines to Identify Parental Alienation Syndrome Diagnosable Mental Health Disorder Abuse professionals have long been concerned about the misuse of parental alienation claims being used to discredit a protective parent, usually a mother, alleging that the other parent, usually a father, has been abusive or is unsafe for the children. Empirical research by Professor Joan Meier, Director of the National Family Violence Law Center at GW Law, revealed and confirmed that in family courts mothers’ claims of abuse, especially child physical or sexual abuse, put them at risk of losing custody to the allegedly abusive fathers, and that fathers’ cross-claims of alienation virtually double that risk. A summary of the findings can be seen here U.S. child custody outcomes in cases involving parental alienation and abuse allegations: what do the data show? ● When fathers cross-claim alienation, courts are more than twice as likely to disbelieve mothers’ claims of any type of abuse than if fathers made no alienation claim; and ● When fathers cross-claim alienation, courts are almost four times more likely to disbelieve mothers’ claims of child abuse than if fathers made no alienation claim. Alienation proponents argued unsuccessfully for decades that PAS is a mental illness and should be included in the the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), a handbook used by healthcare professionals as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. Failing those attempts, proponents shifted focus in recent years to get the term “alienation” inserted under broader pre-existing terms in the DSM, such as parent child contact problems (PCCP). Dr. David Corwin, a professor and Director of Pediatric Forensic Services at the University of Utah and a past president of the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC), stated, “‘Parental Alienation’ almost exclusively affects children of parents with higher socioeconomic status. True mental health disorders are more equally distributed throughout the population, regardless of socioeconomic status, class or social context.” Not the First Time Linda Gottlieb’s Practices Have Been Questioned Linda Gottlieb’s theories and practices have been called into question before. In a Monroe County, NY, family court case JF v DF decision, the court remarked on Linda Gottlieb’s testimony: “For this court, the expert's comment, at times, reached almost the apex of foolishness: she testified that a mother who tells her children that she misses them when they are gone is guilty of alienating conduct and manipulation. If so, every mother in the world needs reprogramming.” Linda Gottlieb and similar practitioners have also been the subject of news articles including in-depth articles in Propublica and Business Insider regarding controversial business practices and harms to children. The investigative reporters researched Gottlieb’s reunification program, which has been ordered by family court judges throughout the country when a parent is accused of parental alienation. Her “reunification” program is one of many such costly, unregulated programs in the U.S.. Fees for Gottlieb’s services begin at $500 an hour. Child Survivors of her "reunification camps" are coming forward to denounce her practices. Some are testifying on behalf of other children at-risk of being sent to her program. Hundreds of children across the United States have been court-ordered into controversial “reunification” treatment programs where they are cut off from the parent they trust and forced to live with the one they fear, but, drawing on a federal law named Kayden’s Law, enacted in 2022, new state laws are being introduced and enacted to curb this practice in family courts and improve the ways in which courts handle abuse evidence. Ohio Mother Did Not See Her Children for Nearly Three Years In these reunification cases, the children are often court ordered to be placed with the allegedly abusive parent. The parent alleging abuse with whom the child wants to stay, usually the mother, is generally not allowed to be with or speak to her children for 90 days. In this Ohio case, as in many others involving abuse allegations and counter claims of PA by the alleged abuser, the standard 90-day sequestration with the allegedly abusive parent is extended and in many cases turns into years of no contact with the parent who alleged abuse. In the Ohio case, the mother is not allowed to talk to anyone about her custody case nor speak about her lawsuit against Linda Gottlieb. For nearly three years, the mother did not see her children and only just recently is allowed minimal contact to visit with them on a “step-up” visitation plan. The mother has never been found to be abusive to the children. At these extreme “reunification camps”, so-called “deprogrammers” attempt to convince children that the alleged abuse never happened, that their safe parent who they want to be with has “indoctrinated” them, and even that their safe parent could go to jail, lose contact entirely, or that the court could send them into foster care if they don’t “cooperate” with the reunification “therapists” and the allegedly abusive parent. Many children have forcibly been taken to such “reunification camps” directly from the courtroom, and many have fought against this, including three young children in a Pennsylvania courtroom recently. These Pennsylvania children had been ordered to Gottlieb’s Turning Points. Time For Kayden’s Law: Passed by Congress, Being Advanced by U.S. States, Endorsed by UN Experts US Congress enacted federal legislation to address the tendency of family courts to dismiss or minimize the history of domestic violence and abuse in custody cases. The Keeping Children Safe From Family Violence Act, also known as “Kayden’s Law” within VAWA, provides states with a roadmap for effective, concise, and research-informed policy reforms to better protect vulnerable children. Since Congressional enactment, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls has researched the systemic harms in family courts and issued her Report on the deception and misuse of the “parental alienation” theory and unsafe reunification therapy and programs. According to the UN report published in 2023 by the UN Special Rapporteur “Deeply embedded gender bias that pervades family court systems across the globe is placing women and children in situations of immense suffering and violence.” “The tendency of family courts to dismiss the history of domestic violence and abuse in custody cases, especially where mothers and/or children have brought forward credible allegations of domestic abuse, including coercive control, physical or sexual abuse is unacceptable,” said Reem Alsalem, UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women. Kayden’s Law in the U.S. Over the past two years in the U.S, several states have enacted legislation reforming child custody statutes based on the federal “Kayden’s Law: Keeping Children Safe From Family Violence Act,” which was developed by the National Family Violence Law Center in collaboration with Congress members and stakeholders. This federal Act was included in the 2022 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reauthorization. It financially incentivizes states to improve their child custody laws in four key interdependent ways in order to increase protections for children at-risk of family violence by (1) requiring substantial evidence-based training on child abuse and IPV for judges and relevant court professionals, (2) requiring courts consider all evidence of past abuse when making child custody decisions, (3) ensuring expert evidence on abuse is provided only by those appropriately qualified (4) restricting courts from ordering unsafe, unproved “reunification treatments”. To date, the states which have enacted the federal Kayden’s Law provisions (partially or in entirety) include the following: Pennsylvania “Kayden’s Law” Passes the House and Goes to the Governor. After five years of concerted effort in Pennsylvania, from where the national reform effort grew, Kayden's Law is headed to the Governor for signature. The new law will save children's lives by ensuring the safety of the child is paramount in custody cases and that abuse evidence is substantially more weighted than other best interest factors, among other improvements. It also authorizes the courts to provide the much needed evidence-based training on family violence. Kayden’s mother, Kathy, has been an outspoken advocate for reform ever since her daughter was brutally murdered during court-ordered custody time with her dangerous father. She and other Pennsylvania survivors, including child survivors, have been calling for reforms for years, while still other children in the state have been forced into “reunification" with a parent they fear and allegedly abused them. Colorado Kayden’s Law HB 23-1178 represents the first state in the U.S. to pass all of the key federal provisions within Kayden’s Law following Congressional enactment in 2022. The Colorado law, led by Representative Froelich, prohibits family courts from cutting off a child’s contact with a safe protective parent to whom they are bonded just to improve a relationship with a rejected parent (oftentimes the parent accused of perpetrating family violence). Colorado courts can no longer order children to unsafe, unproven “reunification treatments”. Only appropriately qualified experts can provide evidence on abuse in child custody litigation and “reunification treatment” cannot be ordered at all, unless there is generally accepted and scientifically valid proof of the therapeutic value and safety of such treatment. And appropriate evidence-based training on family violence is being developed for family court judges. Tennessee Abriel’s Law SB0722, drawing on the “Keeping Children Safe from Family Violence Act" amends child custody law to require judicial training and prohibit a parent in a child custody proceeding from being penalized for making a “good faith complaint” about domestic violence or child abuse. The bill presented by Senator Massey also stipulates that a court cannot remove a child from a parent in a child custody proceeding if the parent has shown to be competent, protective of the child, and not physically or sexually abusive. It restricts the courts from ordering unsafe “reunification treatments”. It passed the legislature unanimously and awaits the Governor’s signature. Utah Om’s Law HB0272 “The Keeping Children Safe from Family Violence Act” adopts all four key interdependent elements of the federal Kayden’s Law, and with this, Utah follows on Colorado’s success doing so last year. The new Utah law, led by Represenative Cutler and Senator McKell, prioritizes child safety in child custody decisions and requires courts to improve their handling of evidence of family violence, including child abuse. The effort was undertaken by state lawmakers and stakeholders following the murder of a Utah boy named Om Moses by his father who had won custody despite ample evidence of abuse and risk. Om’s mother, Leah Moses, testified powerfully before the Utah House and Senate, as did pediatric child abuse experts and other survivors, including youth survivors. California Piqui’s Law SB 331, prohibits California family court judges from ordering children into so-called “reunification camps” and provides that the judicial council will develop and offer judges and other professionals involved in domestic violence and child custody cases additional training. The law is named after Piqui, a California boy preventably murdered by his abusive father, after the father was granted parenting time despite being a clear risk to the child. Child survivors and Piqui’s mother, Ana, told lawmakers of the horrible experience of the courts disregarding pleas for protection and why reforms are so needed. Maryland SB 17 has enacted mandated evidence-based training in child abuse and IPV for judges hearing custody cases, and is now moving to enact similar required training for custody evaluators who are involved in custody cases where abuse is alleged. Maryland survivors have long advocated for protective reforms, including child survivors who were forced back into the custody of an abusive parent despite having a safe protective parent and home available. Here, one such child survivor forced to her sexually abusive father, Nora, testifies before the Maryland House Judiciary. Arizona SB 1372 has just passed the legislature by a narrow margin and now goes to the Governor for consideration. This law, if enacted, would restrict courts from ordering children to unsafe “reunification treatments/camps” - one of the four key components of federal Kayden’s Law. Many survivors, including those impacted by courts ordering “reunification treatments/camps” testified on the need for this law. Several other states have introduced and are advancing bills modeled on Kayden’s Law, allowing an opportunity for youth and adult survivors alike to testify publicly about what is happening inside family courts in the U.S.. Here is a youth survivor in Montana explaining how an “alienation expert” was influential in her case, despite her father having felony charges for perpetrating family violence. Since the 2022 federal enactment of Kayden’s Law: the Keeping Children Safe From Family Violence Act, UN experts have cited it as a model law for child custody reform across countries, including here before the United Nations Human Rights Council. *All court records, including the lawsuit against Linda Gottlieb, referenced in this article were obtained via a public records request. Testimonies from Youth Who Were court Ordered to ‘Reunification Treatments/Camps’” with Linda Gottlieb https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTMMesqxlKY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzYEmjvmHiM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uo6uXtWm0I
1 Comment
|
RSS Feed