First, attend the International Conference on Shared Parenting 2017 (ICSP 2017) on May 29-31, 2017 at the Westin Copley Place Hotel in Boston.
Then attend AFCC 2017 at the Sheraton Boston Hotel immediately after the close of ICSP 2017 on May 31, 2017, a five minute walk from the Westin.
NPO-ICSP 2017 preliminary program available now! #NPO-ICSP2017 npo-icsp2017.org/program/
Registration & Housing for NPO-ICSP 2017 available now. Make sure to register by April 15 for our reduced early bird fees! npo-icsp2017.org/registrationhousing/
Questions can be directed to [email protected]
February 26, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
What Laurie Udesky termed a “dubious theory,” others far more knowledgeable than she call Parental Alienation “child abuse.” Udesky might want to pay attention, but somehow I doubt she will. None other than the chief executive of the U.K.’s Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), Anthony Douglas called parental alienation abuse or neglect (Telegraph, 2/12/17).
And parental alienation is no rare thing in family courts across the pond.
February 24, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
The last few pieces I’ve posted have been about the attack, by the “protective” mother movement on fathers and the idea of parental alienation. One of the more telling aspects of that movement is that they tend strongly to believe that any allegations of abuse levelled at a father by a mother should be taken at face value. So it wasn’t unusual to see, in Laurie Udesky’s piece, the elision of the difference between allegations of abuse and actual findings of abuse.
I checked the website for the Center for Judicial Excellence and sure enough, to this day it includes a reference to Jonea Rogers as a “protective” mother. The fact that Rogers abducted her child, alleging abuse by the father, Ian Stone, despite the police, the local child protective agency and possibly medical authorities as well being unable to corroborate her claims, apparently doesn’t disqualify Rogers as a “protective” mother. As I said yesterday, Dr. Nancy Faulkner’s summary of the science on children’s welfare and parental child abduction strongly suggests that, if either parent was abusive, it was Rogers, not Stone. And of course, way back in 2007, Stone got sole custody of his and Rogers’ daughter, so apparently the family court also disbelieved Rogers. Finally, a Google search for Ian Stone turned up no subsequent claims of child abuse made by anyone. Here’s my 2009 take on the Rogers/Stone case.
February 23, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization
Back in 2000, Dr. Nancy Faulkner reprised the information on parental child abduction here. She made it clear that the state of the science was that parental child abduction is child abuse. Indeed, the title of her piece was “Parental Child Abduction is Child Abuse.”
"Because of the harmful effects on children, parental kidnapping has been characterized as a form of child abuse" reports Patricia Hoff, Legal Director for the Parental Abduction Training and Dissemination Project, American Bar Association on Children and the Law. Hoff explains:
February 22, 2017 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents
Monday’s post was about a thoroughly scurrilous article penned by Laurie Udesky. It masquerades as journalism but is anything but. Udesky channeled the claims of the “protective” mother movement and made next to no effort to locate anyone who could provide balance.
As I mentioned, much of the bias in her article stems from the fact that she chose one type of case, in which apparently abusive fathers received some form of child custody despite the mother’s allegations against him, and no others. Why not give an example of an abusive mother? Why not give an example of a court that investigated claims of abuse and drew the correct conclusion? As to parental alienation – that Udesky dubbed a “dubious” theory - why not interview a qualified expert who understands that PA is all too real? Why not offer a case in which parental alienation occurred and the judge correctly identified it and issued the appropriate order?