- promoting a clearer understanding of men's experience -


MENZ.org.nz Logo First visit to MENZ.org.nz? Here's our introduction page.
MENZ ISSUES

MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Tue 27th December 2016

Parental Alienation

Filed under: Law & Courts — george @ 8:05 am

Currently helping a friend with a family court case.

Their ex lies and is breaking promises involving the child. Child is now of an age where they have worked the parent out. FC have never made the parent accountable and they are now accusing the good parent of parental alienation. Good parent has been trying to tell the other parent for a period of time that their behaviour is damaging the childs perception of them.

The way I see it is the FC creates parental alienation of bad parents because they don’t hold that parent accountable but the child eventually does and then they pull away from that parent.

Abusive partners especially might win in court by bullying the other party but they lose the respect of the child and eventually they lose the relationship. Everyones thoughts?

George

15 Responses to “Parental Alienation”

  1. caughtincourt says:

    Hi George. You’re absolutely right. Generally one parent alienates the other from the children then files an application to formalise that. The courts must then hear both parties but the process itself could take anywhere between three months to several years which in turn further alienates the children from the other parent which no doubt you’re aware of.

    From what I’ve seen many non contact parents and parents with interim contact compound the situation and prolong it through their own conduct, conduct brought about by their sheer frustration. I totally get that, I’ve been guilty of it myself…but it’s counter productive.

    Parental Alienation is an unfortunate reality of this process, some lawyers and judges may even refer to it as “realistic estrangement”. Those who chose to alienate the other parent, especially by exposing the children to adult issues with lies and derogatory comments, run the very real risk of losing the love and respect of those children. What many people lose sight of is that as parents we are bonded to each other by our children. One cannot hurt the other without also hurting our children and ourselves so that kind of behaviour is self destructive and by the time the angry parent works that out it’s too damn late.

    The best approach for the other parent is to create an environment in their home where they are immersed in love and positive, creative energy. Where despite everything, he/she still promotes the other parent and instills in the children their values and morals through their conduct. Children would far rather choose quality time over quantity time. This is an aspect of what the psychologists refer to as Parental Alliance. This shouldn’t be a strategic counter to Parental Alienation although some would deliberately do so by spoiling the children with gifts and trips away…what I’m speaking about is a genuine, holistic parenting style where the energy is focused on the children rather than the ex.

    The abusive one may lie through their teeth in court and may even win…but there’s more to law than law. As long as the friend you’re helping has some contact, the children will work it out and gravitate towards the energy they feel more at ease with, despite what the final parenting order says.

    Frank Hicks

  2. sharingiscaring says:

    Hi George,

    Agree with all your comments.
    Would suggest you and your friend read through and become familiar with the International Human Rights of the Children as laid out in the Convention on the Rights of Children.

    Upholding them will be of great benefit to the children.

    Sharing is Caring.

  3. george says:

    Any ideas on how to overturn cyfs report suggesting good parent is the alienator when it is actually other parents bad behaviour that is distancing child from them?

  4. A dad says:

    Hi george. Cfys reports are unlikely to be overturned. What i have done in the past is called the cyfs worker involved and explained my concern and asked that a note about my concerns be placed on the childrens files which they did. Then when the other parent called to make up yet another falsehood they would call me and i would refer them to my concerns in the file. That helped enormously when dealing with them.
    If the report, like a psychologist report (s133) is directed by the court then it is owned by the court and again cannot be revoked. If anyone has ever had a successful revocation them please let me know

  5. golfa says:

    #3 george. CYFS won’t change a report. However, you can refute its claims in the Court. Call the report writer as a witness and cross examine them. Ask very direct questions how conclusions were formed and why they chose to believe one parent over the other. Quite often it is found that CYFS only spoke to one parent yet they somehow managed to write a report that appears that they spoke to both parents. THAT gives you an opportunity to expose them.

    Also, the “good” parent trying to tell the “bad” parent ANYTHING is a complete waste of time and effort. All you do is piss that parent off and they resent you more.

  6. pissedoffdad says:

    #5 golfa is right. But then you find CYFS dont believe anything you say and the courts dont like it when CYFS are held accountable (ooops did I say accountable – what a joke).

    At the end of the day, the child cant understand parental alienation when most adults dont know what it means.

    Years ago I asked CYFS for help. They turned on me and choose to believe untrue facts without fact checking or even look at my evidence. Its latterly come to bite them on the bum. And im talking more than once here, CYFS have closed the file as everything they claimed is up for dispute.

    If I an offer advice telling with lawyers, CYFS is this: Dont believe anything they say. Go by what they write down.

    FC is a waste of time, energy and of course money. Its gravy money.

    Your child when they become an adult will make there own mind up. Be the best parent you can be. NO ONE IS PERFECT!

  7. Quirky Friend says:

    How old is the child? If the child is 12 or older request that LFC interviews the child on their wishes. It will hold precident over a CYFS report. Additionally, suggest that if there must be contact that a family court appointed counselor facilitates early supervised contact… because this will give a clear indication of the lack of care by the bad parent as (she) won’t respect the kids boundaries.

  8. Simon says:

    Parental Allination is an issue for sure George.
    In my experience, with Parental Alliniation comes all of the “spin off behaviour” in order to “Allinate” . This includes:

    Opposing every minute of time the other parent attempts to spend with the child (for no good reason other than selfish vindictive crap)

    Not making the children available for access in accordance with Court Directions.

    Applying for protection orders when not necessary (in my case I defended two applications successfully)

    Causing difficulties at the school, having you restricted to information.

    Police being called on the father by the mother

    Absurd allegations which must be heard. These allegations appear, to be able to be made with immunity for mummy.

    With out notice applications by the mothers legally aided parasite with impunity for the parasite and for the applicant (mummy, the father doesn’t even know its happening)

    Council for the children fabricating evidence in order to blindly support mummy

    These are the things that are the tools of the allinating parent and supporting process.
    These are the very things the nz family court process seems to do nothing about at all because the allinating parent and the parent who is in a position to perform this behaviour is predomently who? The mother.

    So George, great suggestions of yours but when the tools Of the “allinator” are in full use what are you as Dad going to do when the NZ Famiy Court Process appears to let and has let the mother carry on like this (using the Allination tools) with absolute impunity for decades.

    This behaviour with not only impunity but “with support” financially by way of legal aid and now the much preferred “without notice application” seems to be endorsed by this process. These are the issues at the forefront of the appalling and deserved reputation the NZ Family Court Process has. This behaviour, these tools and support are available for the Allinator.

    This garbage is the very the source of the majority of comments on this site and most other sites where fathers have been allinated out of the child’s life.

    With these tools in full swing, how are you going to be able to have a consistent relationship with the children in order to behave in the lovely and positive way you have recomemded?

    A huge majority of dads have gone after the second arrest and third without notice application, trouble is with this process there is no problem with mummy carrying on and can keep plugging away using “The Process” of “Baffoon Robotic Unthinking Police” combined with the NZ Family Court Process” which must be considered in all of its “end to end full horror”.

    Therefore, included the end to end process must be the process of the law society for when the legally aided parasite representing mummy may appear to break the law or contravene rules, say making “without notice applications” inappropraitally for example. This behaviour will more than likely be found not to have contravined any rules at all by their colleagues down at the so called “impartial, transparent Law Society” when considŵering a complaint against their collegial buddy (which may set a standard and curtail all of their members income and future work prospects)

    Then the process of the LCRO must be considered after the legally aided parasite has contravened rules ( in your view and from the advise you have recieved) but has been found to be AOK by their collegial buddies at the standards committee. You will the encounter another toll that the allinator (via their legally aided parasite) has:j

    The LCRO is three years behind in dealing with complaints, so the legally aided parasite knows this and can continue to parasite away. (another little process supporting Allination tool, most dads will be well gone by then and the kids will be shaving by then so “see yah dad”

    The process of Appeal (including security for costs before you start)
    The juducial conduct commissioners office, should you feel that a judge has behaved inappropraitally (good luck with that one too George)

    The issue here George is not how dads behave because so many have been allinated before they have a chance to parent consistently and therefore “behave at all” as a parent.

    I say these are the real issues to address in the first instance regarding “Parental Allination”

  9. george says:

    I am helping a friend.

    I have witnessed for several years her trying to get a Dad to stop breaking promises to a child, him badmouthing her to the child (and his partner doing the same) and she has asked the father repeatedly to stop it over this period of time knowing that it will eventually hurt his own relationship with his daughter.

    He has made numerous CYFS complaints, called the police unnecessarily and filed extensive litigation or caused litigation to be filed because he wouldn’t consider the childs best interests or honour agreements made outside the PO. The child unfortunately has finally worked him out -as professionals told her she would.

    The mother is now being accused of parental alienation when the father (and his girlfriend) have actually caused this themselves.He has now filed for full custody but sadly even if he wins he will further damage his relationship with his daughter. A very high price to pay for revenge I would say. But ludicrous that the system is pointing the finger at this Mum. She has tried to save him from himself to no avail. Kids do work this out and it happens when they start getting into double digits. I saw this myself with my own kids.

    A lesson for everyone really, don’t damn the other parent and cause them grief- it doesn’t need to be written into PO’s that you don’t speak disparingly of the other parent and you work together in the best interests of the child – you end up damning yourself when you don’t do this. Stupid behaviour – get counselling and get over it….

  10. Simon grant says:

    Come on now George, let’s be honest here,.

    Mummy is faultless then is she?
    Why have a Parenting Order?
    Who was the applicant?
    If mummy is just “such a trooper” how come the court order in the first place?
    Has she ever called the cops on him?
    Not made the children available for access?

    It’s a funny thing but we don’t often here about people who have to go to the Court for a Parenting Order when mummy is so accomidating, cooperative and proactively assisting the ex partner to have a healthy relationship with the father

    They have made agreements outside the Parenting Order too, gee, way to go.
    You see, most parents who cooperate well don’t have a parenting order and your friend, what a marvel she sounds, she must have mentioned the fathers behaviour to the psycologist too, what did she say she/he said? (gosh that’s a few layers of “hear say” George)

    A couple of questions George:
    Are you actually a woman ? ( no offence intended) just seems so odd that a lovley cooperative, accomidating woman needs a Parenting . Was she the applicant, actually wanting the father to have access with the child George?

    If you are actually George and not say, Georginna George are you smitten by this woman, seemingly hard done by saintly mother because she is sounding so open, honest, cooperative, accomidating, child focused, not father bashing, I suggest you might want to marry this on George.

  11. Man X Norton says:

    Yes, there will be two sides to this story. Hassling the other parent over presumed bad communication with the children while in that parent’s care is not a good idea. Children will soon learn that you want to know bad stuff the other parent did and that you will jump to their tune, and they will then exaggerate or make things up to oblige you and as a way of dealing with any dissatisfactions they may have felt in the other parent’s care.

    It’s better to leave the parenting up to the other parent when in that parent’s care and indeed to remind the child that the other parent will do things his/her way and that should be respected. It’s better not to try to impose your own rules and values on the other parent unless laws are being broken and the child is being placed at risk. If the child is coming back to you alleging the other other parent has said things about you and your behaviour, correct any mistaken facts the child appears to believe.

    The account George gives suggests there may have been some alienation, e.g. resulting from the mother’s self-appointed position of dictating how the father parent should behave.

    However, it does sometimes happen that one parent’s own abusive behaviour (or support of their new partner’s abusive behaviour) damages that parent’s relationship with the child, but that parent then blames this damage on alienation by the other parent. Usually there will be some alienating component that arose from the other parent’s genuine concern for the child’s welfare. Unfortunately, once CYFS or the FC psychologist misjudge the situation as being primarily due to alienation, those people are likely to defend their position and their expertise regardless of the evidence. And once the FC has ruled that alienation is responsible, the judge will be reluctant to change that view and thereby admit (s)he got it wrong.

    When a parent is invalidly accused of alienating a child against the other parent, it’s important to challenge this from the outset, e.g. by pointing out that there is no evidence of the range of alienating behaviours such as preventing or disrupting the other parent’s contact. Also, it’s important the accused parent does not bring up numerous criticisms of the other parent without acknowledging any positives. It’s a good idea to patiently gather hard evidence, affidavits from other witnesses etc and only then to strike effectively to make the Court and its advisers see what’s really going on.

    ‘Quirky Friend’ is correct too; as children reach their teens their own wishes become paramount and will only be denied in exceptional circumstances.

  12. hornet says:

    Parental Alienation contradicts the Human Rights Act and the Articles and treaties we signed with the United Nations on Care and protection of children – sadly these treaties are NOT being adhered to by the NZ Justice system and or their legal representatives. Parental Alienation of a child causes SEVERE PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM to the CHILD – regardless of which parent engages in this.

    The FIRST priority of the legislation relating to Children is to PROTECT That child from HARM – so there is a duty of care required by the courts and their representatives to ensure they place the child’s welfare FIRST.

    There is an abundance of evidence to demonstrate that the Conflict creation system we currently engage in for HELP does not want to protect children – and most certainly does not want to help prevent conflict between parents. This must and will change, but it requires many brave and fearless parents and children to stand up and demand change. Far too many children and parents in NZ are now victims of the NZ Family Court circus.

    I have documented evidence of Lawyer for Child actively assisting in the Parental Alienation scam – refusing to protect the child in the face of known and visible harm to his client and then active Collusion by him to remove evidence from the psych report detailing the harm the child was being subjected to!!!!

    This was an independent family court psychological reporting on the child – so rather than protect the child as they were required to do, the lawyers acting for the parents, the judges who reviewed the evidence, and the lawyers for child sought to hide this evidence – removing it from the report – which is perverting the court of justice and is an offence in NZ.

    It is time that parents took action against the NZ Government for the distress, harm and crimes they are currently perpetuating on children – and good parents…………

    Many here know my story – when I complained – my family and I were surveilled, there were attempts to entrap me on criminal charges, followed by character assassination and more recently I received a veiled threat that my children could be taken off me and I will have NO RIGHT to seek their return – given the latest changes to the Govts Child Snatching laws – they have removed a parents right to Due process if your child is removed from your care………this is all very reminiscent of the way in which Colonisation took place here in NZ, and is exactly how the Palestinians are being persecuted daily – children are taken and never given back.

    The world has moved on, the people are no longer tolerant of these archaic and draconian methods of control and persecution. Least not when the state suggest child snatching as the answer when everything else has failed……..to hide the TRUTH of what is actually happening here in NZ………..there will be many children coming of age now – all victims of state sanctioned parental alienation and abuse which they were NEVER protected from – children who will be demanding answers – for they are all victims of failed government policy and a failure of the government systems to protect their own children – governments who failed to ensure they were abiding by the treaties and human rights obligations they agreed to protect.

    This will change – for it is only a matter of time – child victims and parents who have been subjected to the will unite and do so in great numbers…….

    My child is now 16 years – she has had 14 years of this preventable damage…….against all my efforts to protect her, against all my attempts to get the government agencies to HELP protect her from this…and to date NOT ONE HAS……..not a single one has had the fortitude to acknowledge we have a problem – child abuse is endemic in our nation and in other western democracies and we need to see immediate change………..as we have seen yet again with TOLLEY refusing to open an investigation into Government Abuse of Children in State care – we have another avalanche of complaints coming home to roost how with all these kids destroyed by parental alienation……another crime of state……..

    Hornet……

  13. simon Grat says:

    Gee, I had he same thing

    Most likely Perversion of the Course of Justice by C$C with detriment outcomes for the children.

    Psychologist contradicting her own report three times

    Judge making directions with out evidence.

    A dead body in the mothers garage fro the children to walk in on C$C (no problems here)

    The mother turns into a P head Bikee jump.

    But hey Quick discredit the father “are you ware you have been under surveillance”
    C$C in court.

    Webb sites you go to put before the court – C$C (you don’t get to see it or defend it though)

    Directions (smart, sensible) put in place by a very good female Judge but removed by a renowned gender biased ideologist.

    You name it, many agree the NZ Family Court process has it. Know it, see it for what it is. Many are now and even the NZ Family Court seem to be saying Gee, look at the number of applicants (fathers)who are not completing their application process -they are giving up before their first $10,000 is wasted.

  14. DJ Ward says:

    This is the scam.
    Create a system were people fight over thier kids.
    Create a system were people are forced to hire lawyers.
    Make unjust decisions so people fight more.
    Don’t enforce decisions so people fight more.
    Don’t punish perjury.
    Protect dodgy lawyers, police, and judges.
    Have a Human Rights Comissioner awake at the wheel of the HMNZS Misandry.

    I’m a real feminist.
    Men and women are equals.
    50:50
    No child support.
    Negotiate from thier.

  15. DJ Ward says:

    Here is the breast feeding Nazi at work.
    The ultimate parental alienation.
    Just take the kids without any right to do so.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/16/parents-had-week-old-baby-taken-away-social-services-father/

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

Since May 2019 this site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

« »

Powered by WordPress

Skip to toolbar