This video doesn’t exist
REMINDER: Our next nationwide conference call regarding the Parent March on Washington is tonight, and every Thursday (and Monday nights) at 7 pm EST. Call the same number and code being used all along: Call (605) 313-4165, then enter access code 763491.
Dr. Leon Koziol
Parenting Rights Institute
A 24-page report has been completed and will be the main component of our lobby packet to Congress and Justice Department on Lobby Day, May 2, 2019. That’s the middle day of our 3-day Parent March on Washington. Click here for itinerary and purpose.
This report details how federal funds are being abused by divorce and family courts to cause parental alienation and human rights violations. It contains highly valuable information based on my 23 years as a practicing attorney in these courts, 12 years as an abused parent, and 10 years as a whistleblower victim.
A federal investigation, congressional oversight hearing, Shared Parenting Law and Judicial Whistleblower Protection Act are among the recommendations being made. It is now available at no cost by e-mailing me at firstname.lastname@example.org or viewing it here. That link will soon be provided.
This report should be used to request meetings on Lobby Day with your representatives and contacts in Washington. Here is an opening excerpt:
A FEDERAL FUNDED EPIDEMIC
While our federal government struggles with illegal parents separated from their children at our borders, American parents are being separated daily and without accountability in family courts across our country. Under federal law, a “custodial parent” is mandated for states to qualify for billions of dollars in performance grants, Dept of Family v DHHS, 588 F.3d 740 (1st Cir. 2009). This, in turn, undermines shared parenting laws and cooperation, i.e. Bast v Rossoff, 91 NY2d 723 (1998)(attorney parents’ agreement struck down for failure to name a “custodial parent”).
Under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 USC Section 658(a), state courts earn vast amounts of revenues from our federal government through performance grants based on the number and size of child support orders issued and satisfied. Not only does this create an inherent and systemic bias among ostensibly impartial jurists, it incites needless conflict between parents forced into an oppositional framework for deciding custody, support and other disputes.
Originally intended to recoup aid to needy families from absentee fathers, Title IV-D was later expanded to encompass all “non-custodial parents,” good and bad. By lumping them together, federal funding was thereby increased exponentially. Such a performance-based program proved highly ineffective on common sense grounds alone. Parents who love their children will use their God-given liberties to advance the interests of their offspring. Instead, natural human incentives are countermanded and replaced by a rigid control structure for money generating purposes.
Federal money thrown at divorce and family courts in this way has become the proverbial gas thrown on a fire. As veteran family judges have observed, this oppositional framework leads to a winner-take-all contest that draws the worst from parents at a time when children need their best. One example is the case of Webster v Ryan, 729 NYS2d 315 (Fam. Ct. 2001) at fn 1, where “parenting time” was preferred over “custody” and “visitation” due to a system which has “outlived its usefulness.” Such terms are more appropriate for prisons and funerals, but their use here causes judges to treat parents as criminals and objects of exploitation for federal funds.
Title IV-D protects this antiquated “custody” framework derived from a day when moms were caretakers and dads were the breadwinners. From that outdated framework, an epidemic has emerged which is producing escalating harm to government, families and society as a whole. It is a silent epidemic suppressed by special interests and bar associations which benefit from custody and support battles. Federal funds have induced states to seize parental authority beyond the rational limits of the judges and lawyers they license to regulate family relationships.
The separation here is not the simple product of divorcing or separated parents. It is an insidious form of separation, far worse than the kind experienced by immigrants, because children are being programmed to ignore, even hate their parents, for the principal purpose of generating lawyer profits and court revenues. Worse yet, it is done every day without so much as a pause from federal lawmakers who, knowingly or not, funded the parent-child separations. The end result is a panoply of societal ills that have elevated government programs and taxpayer burdens.
This insidious form of separation has become understood as “Parental Alienation.” That term derives from the work of Dr. Richard Gardner, an American child psychologist who produced books and studies to show a condition known as Parent Alienation Syndrome or PAS. This condition emerged from custody and support wars featuring one or both parents abusing our courts for reasons other than the “best interests of children.” By removing the “non-custodial parent” from children’s lives, the alienator and courts guarantee a support and revenue stream.
It has become a pay-to-parent scandal, a tax on children, where parent alienation is not so much a condition as it is a symptom. It can be compared to tobacco companies which denied the harmful effects of smoking for decades to resist protective laws. Here, one entity to target is the highly automated Child Support Collection Center in Albany, New York. It has a single confidential office which rakes in billions of dollars in aid and support interest with little accountability.
Click here to read: (Full Report)