In fact, I don't believe a parent CAN leave the US with a child without signed consent from the other parent. When my daughter was younger, her school sponsored a trip to Mexico for parent/child pairs. Although we did not require a passport, we were cautioned to bring signed consent from the parent not travelling. This raised issues for a couple of us who had adopted as single parents. We brought what we had to document our status, and in fact we were asked, and had to hold things up while some airline personnel called for approval. This was before 9/11. I would imagine that things have only gotten tighter since then.
MI - Three siblings in juvenile detention for contempt, Pontiac, 9 July 2015
- Thread starter Hoosgirl
- Start date
- Status
In fact, I don't believe a parent CAN leave the US with a child without signed consent from the other parent. When my daughter was younger, her school sponsored a trip to Mexico for parent/child pairs. Although we did not require a passport, we were cautioned to bring signed consent from the parent not travelling. This raised issues for a couple of us who had adopted as single parents. We brought what we had to document our status, and in fact we were asked, and had to hold things up while some airline personnel called for approval. This was before 9/11. I would imagine that things have only gotten tighter since then.
Not entirely certain that hatred of the other parent is the motivation. Been doing just a bit of reading up. Some mention narcissistic personality disorder--which looks like a bit better fit. The alienating parents simply becomes obsessed with being the preferred parent (listen to some of Maya's statements in which see claims to have attempted to school Omer in how to get the children to love him), sets up a choice for the children in which any affection shown to the other parent is an attack on the alienating parent, may threaten or imply a need for the children to be with him/her to prevent suicide or depression, and convinces the children that they not only NEED the alienating parent, but that they will LOSE this parent should they "go over to the other side."
http://parentalalienationsupport.co...ion-the-evolution-of-defamation-and-defiance/
Been lurking on one of the closed FB groups in support of Maya. The have uploaded a rather lengthy court doc, which I would be happy to attach here if there is a way to do so. The purpose of the filing was to demonstrate to the court her diligence in complying with court orders vis-a-vis visitation. While it does provide some evidence of this (example: children were available for Skype from X to Y time; call began at such and such and ended at such and such), it barely touches on how visits actually "went," (example--one email from Omer's atty noted the parental supervisor as observing that the children finished eating ahead of the sup, said nothing at all, except to ask to leave when finished--and older son refused to drink from water glass after dad asked for a refill on his behalf). This recalls for me a comment elsewhere that the Skype calls consisted of the children staring at the ceiling and were unresponsive for the entire time.
However, my overall impression from reading the entire 176 pages is that Mom is really one controlling person--requiring pre-approval of every place the children were to meet Dad, ordering food for the children before leaving so that they would eat and essentially pre-planning every move that was to occur. All through attorneys. One email from the GAL to the Dad's attorney responded in what sounded like exasperation to an inquiry about whether the GAL had a copy of the children's extracurricular schedule--which he had been having difficulty in obtaining, although requested. The GAL intimated that this is the sort of thing that parents really ought to be able to communicate about directly without layers of attorneys. But--when the schedule was provided, it was also revealing. Not only are the children scheduled for some form of lesson (Tae Quan Do, Violin, etc, etc) every day of the week--but all three are scheduled for the same block of time for the same lesson. Now, maybe this is a means of ensuring that there is little available time for visiting with Dad, but it also suggests some lack of consideration for each of the children having individual interests, developmental levels and the like. One set of lessons (maybe it was Tae Quon Do) also included Mom in the classes. Interestingly it was THIS class to which Dad was invited to observe. Sorry for the folks who are thinking that Dad is to blame for all issues that these kids are facing. It just felt creepy to me.
Mods--if there is a way to upload the doc (176 page PDF), please let me know. I would love to share.
However, my overall impression from reading the entire 176 pages is that Mom is really one controlling person--requiring pre-approval of every place the children were to meet Dad, ordering food for the children before leaving so that they would eat and essentially pre-planning every move that was to occur. All through attorneys. One email from the GAL to the Dad's attorney responded in what sounded like exasperation to an inquiry about whether the GAL had a copy of the children's extracurricular schedule--which he had been having difficulty in obtaining, although requested. The GAL intimated that this is the sort of thing that parents really ought to be able to communicate about directly without layers of attorneys. But--when the schedule was provided, it was also revealing. Not only are the children scheduled for some form of lesson (Tae Quan Do, Violin, etc, etc) every day of the week--but all three are scheduled for the same block of time for the same lesson. Now, maybe this is a means of ensuring that there is little available time for visiting with Dad, but it also suggests some lack of consideration for each of the children having individual interests, developmental levels and the like. One set of lessons (maybe it was Tae Quon Do) also included Mom in the classes. Interestingly it was THIS class to which Dad was invited to observe. Sorry for the folks who are thinking that Dad is to blame for all issues that these kids are facing. It just felt creepy to me.
Mods--if there is a way to upload the doc (176 page PDF), please let me know. I would love to share.
gitana--I wonder if you would care to take a look at and comment on the attached psych report.
There have apparently been multiple eval/counseling situations ordered by the court. This one appears to have been arranged by the mom. It strikes me as odd. First off, it mentions having "seen" mom and kids--but does not specify any specifics regarding evaluation. Further--it spends a lot of time discussion dad and his desires and expectations--apparently without ever having met the man. Which makes his conclusion that the kids don't have a problem, but dad does seem like it is invented from whole cloth.
And last, his suggestion to the GAL that he recuse himself owing to some prior knowledge of one another that the Dr. has "heard" about seems particularly off-base, as I would regard this as being more a legal than a psychological matter.
Now, I am certainly aware that there are specialists for hire to say all kinds of things--but this one strikes me as being particularly bizarre. Or am I off-base?
Here is some related news: http://crimemagazine.com/twitter-gets-dragged-ugly-custody-battle
I don't know where the legalities fall on this, but apparently Dad's attorney subpoenaed Twitter for the identity behind one of the groups on FB/Twitter that has been very vocal (perhaps even nauseatingly so) for the Mom's side. Not certain exactly what they are going after, although according to the lead-up to the recent gag order there was testimony about threats having been made--to the camp where the kids are, and possibly some others (judge? attys?). One of the affiliated FB sites is a good go-to for court docs (at least prior to the gag order). But, they have also gotten a bit deep into cyber "digging" and sometimes sound like a group of giggly high school mean girls. At one point asking if anyone knew the address of the parenting supervisor (who was actually hand-selected by Mom), and going after info on the exes and even children of any perceived as being "on the other side," (such as someone from group supporting parents allegedly harmed by parental alienation).
I don't know where the legalities fall on this, but apparently Dad's attorney subpoenaed Twitter for the identity behind one of the groups on FB/Twitter that has been very vocal (perhaps even nauseatingly so) for the Mom's side. Not certain exactly what they are going after, although according to the lead-up to the recent gag order there was testimony about threats having been made--to the camp where the kids are, and possibly some others (judge? attys?). One of the affiliated FB sites is a good go-to for court docs (at least prior to the gag order). But, they have also gotten a bit deep into cyber "digging" and sometimes sound like a group of giggly high school mean girls. At one point asking if anyone knew the address of the parenting supervisor (who was actually hand-selected by Mom), and going after info on the exes and even children of any perceived as being "on the other side," (such as someone from group supporting parents allegedly harmed by parental alienation).
ellemo
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2013
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 46
Umm, either this is fake or this guy got his PHD from a Cracker Jack box. I am leaning toward this is a fake and somebody is masquerading as this guy.
I know you didnt ask me specifically, but I feel compelled to comment.
You are securely on base.
First in letters like this, professionals, well, write letters on letterhead. Health professionals are very cautious about privacy (HIPAA anyone?) and don't send confidential info like this via email. Its not even going directly to the courts, it is being sent to a roadrunner email address.
Second, they generally start out identifying themselves (I am a Licensed psychologist specializing in .or with 25 years experience in.....) and identifying the patient. Not Ive seen "all the children"
What psychologist sees a family like this and says "Psychotherapy be discontinued immediately."??? I could understand if he recommended a certain type of therapy, but it is quite clear that these kids need some sort of counseling. At the very least if everything the mom said is true, the kids have parent abandonment issues.
No decent psychologist would write "It is absurd for them to continue in therapy since it conveys a message that there is something wrong with them." Therapy is not just for the mentally ill. At the most, he would write therapy is not recommended at this time or something else much more professional.
I agree, the comments about the dad are off. A therapist might write The kids feel pressure from the dad who they say complains . . ." not make unattributed statements about the dad.
He would sign the letter with Ron Rice, PHD, Licensed Psychologist as he does on his website
There are several typos, odd phrases and grammatical errors. FOR EXAMPLE
"opportunity of meeting" should be to meet
"couple of weeks" -- much too informal for a PhD to write in a business letter
"children being involved in psychotherapy" -- very odd phrasing
"In reality, the children have no problems -- no way! a real therapist would write, "In my opinion, the children are well-adjusted. . . "
"kids"- much too informal
I went to this Dr.s website and this letter doesnt sound like the same guy
The Dr. who believes this, would NEVER write It is absurd for them to continue in therapy
However, I do find it suspect that Dr. Rices website does not mentioned where he got his Ph.D, nor does it many any professional memberships.
LinasK
Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 26,862
- Reaction score
- 24,205
BBM. Having gotten a passport for my underage daughter a couple of years ago, both myself and my husband were required to be at the hearing with the official with my daughter and he asked her to verify we were her parents and both of us that we approved her getting it, IIRC.
LinasK
Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 26,862
- Reaction score
- 24,205
Agreed. The phrase "discontinue therapy immediately" sounds fishy, red flag. It sounds exactly like something the mother would word.
Interesting discussion. I confess, it hadn't occurred to me that the thing was an outright fake--although the email with card stapled to it struck me as odd.
I believe that the judge may have not allowed it as evidence in the record. Maya supporters were also hot that an ER report supposedly claiming abuse was not admitted. In fact, the ER report restates what was told to the doc, along with reports of "tenderness" (meaning yes answer to "does it hurt when I do this") and a recommendation for tylenol and ice as needed. This was also passed along to CPS who investigated. The credibility issue in that case was that the supposed "incident" took place in full view of the parenting supervisor (who was selected by Maya and has been with the case now for several years)--who reported things very differently.
I have for awhile been viewing this mom as pathological--engaged in an unwinnable power play with a former husband who has clearly moved on in his affections. She has a great facility for drama and obfuscation--which I glean from the blow by blows of multiple hand-offs of the kids for supervised "parenting time" with their father. Included in the court record is a sworn affadavit of her objections to a "parenting time therapist" who attempted to work with the family. Maya objected strongly to the woman's use of non-pejorative language in attempting to discuss what seems to have been a key event that took place in a park. The therapist requested that Maya "tell the story" of what happened that day to each child. Maya objected that they already know--they can tell. Therapist switched to "can you tell each other the story?" Maya also objected to the language stating that "the children have formed a memory," which might allow for the possibility that not everyone saw the same things and that memory (particularly memory of an event occurring at age 4, but having considerable retelling) is impacted by all kinds of things. And the final objection was that the therapist named the elephant in the living room. She stated to the children that "there is a family rule that no one is to talk to their father." She said she didn't know who made the rule, or how it is enforced. But clearly, based on every observable behavior from multiple sources it is very clear that the children refuse to talk to their father. I thought that this, again pretty non-pejorative and child-appropriate language, was masterful. However, Maya objected. The therapist's recommendations (I cannot find a copy of the report) were apparently adopted by the court. But it was striking to me the reaction to anything that might touch on recognizing or changing a pretty toxic situation.
But--I am wondering now if Maya's pathologies extend to pathological lying.
LinasK
Verified insider- Mark Dribin case
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 26,862
- Reaction score
- 24,205
BBM. It wouldn't surprise me She's had her twisted PR campaigns (children holding protest signs) to garner public support and sympathy. Then there's her flagrant disobeying of the camp rules by bringing the dog and her neighbor for the picnic lunch and trying to have it off the grounds, and taking the kids out of the country when dad made the effort to fly to see them- all of which her supporters fail to address, they convieniently ignore these facts... After I saw how Linda Cooney had brain-washed her sons, to the point where the one she attempted to kill testified to protect her that instead really he was trying to commit suicide. I believe anything is possible with this mother.
View attachment 20150805_MOTION_FLD_DFT_FOR_SANCTION-CAMP-ATTY_FEES_064185037.pdf
For folks who enjoy reading the blow by blow. In this one the critical issue is who pays for the "extra" camp charges (additional security and the like).
However, what is interesting it what is noted about the need for the kids to get physicals to be at camp (as an old camp hand myself, this is pretty SOP). GAL attempted to get a doc to perform the physicals at camp, but in the end, they had to allow Maya to take the kids to an emergent care center. Apparently the medical record (not included) notes that while the kids were in exam rooms, Maya tried to recruit various personnel in the center to "end this torture," telling them that they had the power to do so. Again--as an old camp hand, that's pretty extreme. Some kids enjoy camp more than others, but torture? Hardly. And this particular camp would appear to be on the upscale side.
Also noted--social media claims about the "real" reason for the doc visit. I have read these (and wondered about a source--since most of the posters claim no direct connection to the family). They go along the lines of the kids all had bronchitis and were coughing up blood--and highly contagious (my understanding of bronchitis is that it is not contagious). There were also earlier claims that the youngest was refusing to eat and had lost weight.
I say good luck to any therapist who takes on this family. But, I have some real worries about those kids remaining in her care--regardless of whether they end up with their father. I think she is loopy.
For folks who enjoy reading the blow by blow. In this one the critical issue is who pays for the "extra" camp charges (additional security and the like).
However, what is interesting it what is noted about the need for the kids to get physicals to be at camp (as an old camp hand myself, this is pretty SOP). GAL attempted to get a doc to perform the physicals at camp, but in the end, they had to allow Maya to take the kids to an emergent care center. Apparently the medical record (not included) notes that while the kids were in exam rooms, Maya tried to recruit various personnel in the center to "end this torture," telling them that they had the power to do so. Again--as an old camp hand, that's pretty extreme. Some kids enjoy camp more than others, but torture? Hardly. And this particular camp would appear to be on the upscale side.
Also noted--social media claims about the "real" reason for the doc visit. I have read these (and wondered about a source--since most of the posters claim no direct connection to the family). They go along the lines of the kids all had bronchitis and were coughing up blood--and highly contagious (my understanding of bronchitis is that it is not contagious). There were also earlier claims that the youngest was refusing to eat and had lost weight.
I say good luck to any therapist who takes on this family. But, I have some real worries about those kids remaining in her care--regardless of whether they end up with their father. I think she is loopy.
Your understanding about bronchitis is wrong. It could be contagious.
"Acute, which can last for 1 to 3 weeks. Its usually caused by cold or flu viruses. Since these viruses are contagious, acute bronchitis usually is, too."
http://www.webmd.com/lung/is-bronchitis-contagious
"Acute, which can last for 1 to 3 weeks. Its usually caused by cold or flu viruses. Since these viruses are contagious, acute bronchitis usually is, too."
http://www.webmd.com/lung/is-bronchitis-contagious
Well, red herring. Depending on whether it is viral or otherwise.
I don't believe that 1) the children were all coughing up blood; and 2) that the camp would agree to their being there under those conditions. And where would Team Maya get such information anyway?
I think it's a very safe bet they don't have the chronic kind.
The more important question is whether they had ANY kind.
ellemo
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2013
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 46
Nor would the doctors allow them back at the camp if this were the case.
I feel so bad for the kids. I don't think putting the kids in a juvenile detention center was a good idea on the part of the judge but I can see why it was done; the judge must have been so frustrated by the mom's and kids' behaviors. These poor kids are so screwed up and the mother sounds like she is very unstable. I hope someday they can have a relationship with their dad. At the very least, I hope they have a healthy relationship with SOMEONE (parent, friend significant other) as an adult.
Detroit Free Press discusses Reunification Therapy in relationship to the case. http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...oakland-county-family-court-experts/31435087/.
I believe there is a court hearing tomorrow, presumably to nail down the specifics of what happens when camp lets out. I reviewed the court hearing (available on youtube) in which the judge approved the children going to camp. Striking that the GAL had two key points in his presentation. One was that the kids needed to be out of Children's Village (actually, there were two possibilities offered--the residential camp, or a day camp with a requirement that the kids stay elsewhere). The second was that they be kept away from Mom.
Also heartening that he reported having had ongoing conversations with the oldest child (as well as the others) in which they were able to discuss the role of the GAL--as an advocate for the children. Heartened because there is a lot of rhetoric about the need of the children to be heard--and yet there appears to have been some pretty consistent meddling in any relationship (therapy, counseling, GAL, etc) in which the children could in fact speak and be heard.
According to the article it is likely that the reunification therapy will not include Mom. I don't know how this plays out down the road, but clearly these children need to be afforded an opportunity to process all of the divorce/custody process free from her particular beliefs and preferences.
I believe there is a court hearing tomorrow, presumably to nail down the specifics of what happens when camp lets out. I reviewed the court hearing (available on youtube) in which the judge approved the children going to camp. Striking that the GAL had two key points in his presentation. One was that the kids needed to be out of Children's Village (actually, there were two possibilities offered--the residential camp, or a day camp with a requirement that the kids stay elsewhere). The second was that they be kept away from Mom.
Also heartening that he reported having had ongoing conversations with the oldest child (as well as the others) in which they were able to discuss the role of the GAL--as an advocate for the children. Heartened because there is a lot of rhetoric about the need of the children to be heard--and yet there appears to have been some pretty consistent meddling in any relationship (therapy, counseling, GAL, etc) in which the children could in fact speak and be heard.
According to the article it is likely that the reunification therapy will not include Mom. I don't know how this plays out down the road, but clearly these children need to be afforded an opportunity to process all of the divorce/custody process free from her particular beliefs and preferences.
According to the dad's custody filing the medical record from the camp physicals visit included a notation that while the kids were being examined she approached several personnel asking that they "end this torture," telling them that they "had the power" to do so.
Mom had also submitted an affidavit earlier on detailing her objections to the evaluation of a "parenting time evaluator." It sadly provides her first-person description of sabotaging the attempt of the evaluator to discuss (non-judgmentally) the events in the park that spurred a 911 call and subsequent abuse investigation. I agree, Mom appears to have some real issues, which is sad, but even sadder that she has amassed a coterie of supporters who are unable to see this--preferring to believe that the judge, the GAL, the father, the father's attorney, the attorneys appointed for the children, a string of therapists and counselors and even the parenting supervisor that Mom herself selected and a string of attorneys for Mom who are no longer representing here, ALL of these people are somehow conspiring against her (and the children).
Mom had also submitted an affidavit earlier on detailing her objections to the evaluation of a "parenting time evaluator." It sadly provides her first-person description of sabotaging the attempt of the evaluator to discuss (non-judgmentally) the events in the park that spurred a 911 call and subsequent abuse investigation. I agree, Mom appears to have some real issues, which is sad, but even sadder that she has amassed a coterie of supporters who are unable to see this--preferring to believe that the judge, the GAL, the father, the father's attorney, the attorneys appointed for the children, a string of therapists and counselors and even the parenting supervisor that Mom herself selected and a string of attorneys for Mom who are no longer representing here, ALL of these people are somehow conspiring against her (and the children).
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...-alienation-oakland-circuit-court/31537469/he judge has ordered a five day intensive reunification program for Dad and the kids following camp. Mom is not permitted. Then a 90 day temp placement with Dad before the next hearing to review custody. Looks like a tough way to go--but I do think it wise
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...al-alienation-oakland-circuit-court/31537469/
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...al-alienation-oakland-circuit-court/31537469/
- Status