Demand that the Orlando Sentinel and Detroit News cease running Kathleen Parker's columns.
Orlando Sentinel Columnist editor Mike Murphy
mjmurphy@orlandosentinel.com
direct ph # 407/420-5168
Murphy's Supervising editor - Manney Pynn 407/420-5715
To the Editors:
Please ban Kathleen Parker from publishing any more articles on custody litigation and fathers issues, unless she prints an apology and retraction of her recent article which included mention of Maine Governor Baldacci and Parental Alienation.
We have talked at length with Governor Baldacci's office and he was very unhappy to learn of Parker's reference to Governor Baldacci in this article:
K. Parker "Let's not alienate parents in custody... " 5/13/06/ Detroit News
The Governor's office was not aware, when a low level staff person had a recent telephone discussion with a fathers’ rights representative, that they would be endorsing Parental Alienation. The staff person was not authorized and probably did not confirm the Governor's endorsement of Parental Alienation or a special Parental Alienation Awareness day. Upon learning more about the fathers’ groups who promote Parental Alienation and Richard Gardner, they definitely do not endorse it. [Interesting to note that Baldacci's website does not have a link to the to the 4/25/06 Parental Alienation Proclamation.]
We have followed Parker's writing on the subject of the fathers’rights/custody movement for many years and find her writings to be very irresponsible, malicious and sometimes dishonest. She does not separate 'fact' from her own personal subjective opinions about the virtuousness of men, and does not check the "facts" she does use in her opinion writings.
Parker doesn't appear to be cognizant of the fact she is writing about the legal outcomes other people's court cases, when insisting that those outcomes have not been fair to the same group of people [i.e., the father's groups] which she does not disclose to her general readership that she has been closely associated with.
She continually infers that legal adversaries of her patrons have won these court cases by perjury and deceit, in addition to being malicious parents.
We are the people Parker has been slandering for years. Yet, she will not communicate with us, or cite any specific cases or court orders to support the claims she makes, or verify facts by checking the court orders. Instead, she relies solely on the word of the fathers she has been patronizing for years - and who most people in protective parent custody circles know to be a "gang" of violent sociopathic liars who have been kicked out of many Congressional offices and state legislative hearings because of their crude and threatening conduct.
The Baldacci incident is one of many such dishonest involvements on their part.
We know who these men are - they are our ex-husbands - and many of them are seriously disturbed and violent men who are organized for the sole purpose of getting revenge against the mothers of their children so they don't have pay child support. Some have even killed their own children and the mother, out of sheer vengeance, per many news reports. Parker seems oblivious to these disturbing facts and continues to represent their community as totally innocent victims of malicious mothers who lie in court to get sole custody.
Parker and her editor have the mistaken notion that her writings are 'opinions' subject to different interpretations. However, this is not just an opinion in which a party in a domestic litigation was awarded custody or ordered to pay child support. Court orders are legal facts.
Parker has been in error on this point and similar points she has been making in her columns. She wrongfully reports that the fathers as a "class" have been unjustifiable losers in custody litigation - without defining the class or citing the relevant court orders as evidence.
We know the truth, because we are the parties in that litigation and not Kathleen Parker. These are OUR court cases and not hers.
The truth is that the fathers are winning most of the issues and motions and mothers are the ones victimized by loss of all custody rights, loss of most or all contact with their children, loss of income because of unreasonable court ordered child support obligations and most importantly – we are the victims of parental alienation misconduct that the fathers complain about. It is the fathers Parker patronizes who are the parental alienators - not the mothers - because most of the litigating mothers have little contact with their children, even ones with joint custody.
The fathers have been feeding Parker a bunch of lies for years to which she has printed lock, stock, and barrel without any verification attempts.
They don't tell her (and she has shown no interest in learning)that they are in control of specialized federal HHS program funds which are used to pay their custody attorneys. They are in the business of generating domestic dispute litigation for the benefit of crooked attorneys and court evaluators. The fathers need to create a climate of fear among the prospective litigating-father community in order to pull in more business for their litigation scam. Parker's collaboration with their disinformation campaign is tantamount to collaboration in an illegal litigation solicitation scheme.
The funds being used for fathers’ cases are not authorized for these purposes, which is why several Congressional committees are reviewing the matter, in addition to high level HHS legal officials.
Parker is so self-righteous about her crusade to advance the rights of fathers, that she obviously failed or didn’t care enough to check out Richard Gardner's Parental Alienation Syndrome(PAS)- which she also mentioned in this recent column.
She apparently has never done a Google search on Richard Gardner, or she would have learned he is an incest advocate with many published statements which blatantly endorse father-child incest as a positive experience, with severe punishment for mothers who interfere. Parental Alienation is nothing more than a semi-dignified way to normalize father-child incest by preventing mothers from complaining by keeping them away from the affected children.
This is why every professional organizations involved in family and child litigation has condemned Gardner and PAS – including:
National Center for the Prosecution of Child Abuse
NCPCA Update Newsletter Volume 16, Number 6, 2003
NCPCA Update Newsletter Volume 16, Number 7, 2003
The NCPCA has published a double edition report saying it should not be used in court because it is harmful to children.
Yet Parker talks about Gardner and PAS in her recent column as if it were a great advance in social research whose time as come.
Parker must inform her readers that PAS is not acceptable and is harmful to children and that the fathers' rights men she patronizes are not custody court victims.
Liz Richards
nafcj.org
Kavanaugh for SCOTUS: So how fucked are we?
5 years ago
4 comments:
Liz Richards is a disturbed and dangerous woman. She appears to adhere to the belief that if a mother claims the father is abusing her children is it by definition true and any attempt by the father to defend himself against such accusations is merely proving himself to be an abuser. The illogic of this and the no-win position in which it places many good fathers does not seem to occur to her. Please note that in this letter, she is trying to restrict free speech. Incidentally, a far as I can tell, she is the NAFCJ, there is no "we".
i would suggest that liz get a life and move on
Wow. What a rant. Could we have a person making observations that are tarnished with misandry.
Hard to believe someone would think these kinds of things but then she is no doubt convinced that you can abuse children by bad mouthing a father until the child is brain washed and hates the dad. Pity the child.
For a first hand account of brainwashing and PA see my blog in the first person about how a stay-at-home dad is being alienated from his children. It is happening now and is ongoing.
Post a Comment