MI - Three siblings in juvenile detention for contempt, Pontiac, 9 July 2015

[Morag]

The problem is that the sole source for a good bit of this information is Mom--through her lawyer. The reply to the GAL's request for a limited ruling was all over the map--full of accusations. On the one hand Mom claims she is being left out of the loop regarding the kids, decisions, etc. On the other hand she claims to know that the kids are deteriorating and that a counselor recommends splitting the kids up, and that the counselor is denigrating her to the kids. She is supposed to be prohibited from contacting the kids at school, yet she claims to know about their absences and what they are telling their teachers. All of these things cannot be true.

While I have concerns about some of the claims--knowing that even with full support Dad would be facing parenting challenges--I remain skeptical, very skeptical.

BBM
Does the court have the ability to forbid the teachers from informing Mom about her children? How are their grades, are they acting out, do they have health issues, etc... Surely the mother is entitled to know those things, regardless of her ability to contact them at school.
I certainly don't think Dad is the only person capable of telling/knowing the truth in this case.

And if he would be willing to have two of the kids 'put away' for his own convenience (doesn't want to cope with rebellious disagreeable kids), then I am reminded of Solomon and the two mothers- one of whom was willing to have the baby -claimed by both- split in half. Most of us have moments when we can hardly bear to deal with our kids. But we would never send them away just to avoid the unpleasantness.

The mother may not have been perfect, but they love her and were doing well, regardless of her imperfections. Lots of parents are a little crazy, lots of people are a little nuts, but they are still capable of raising and caring for their children. This case is very ugly, and the children are suffering while being separated from their mother.

I would love to know what the stepmother thinks about all of this. Does she love the children devotedly despite the disruption they seem to be causing? Or does she wish it could just be the three of them, Mommy, Daddy, and little baby?

 

[Hope4More]

Perhaps the stepmother is unwilling to deal with the two older children and wants to send them away and only keep the cute little one? The mother may or may not be a little wacky, but she has been there for the kids their entire lives. Many children are estranged from a parent who has abandoned them by moving away and moving on.
The father is giving off very distinct "dog in the manger" vibes. If he is willing to put one of them in foster care and to send another to a so- called wilderness camp, just to keep them away from the mother they love, he is a real lowlife.

That's one mighty big IF.

Another if: if you wade through all 20 pages of the last Motion you will learn:

1. The accusation about separating the kids is first stated as...the unauthorized therapist seeing the kids has recommended the kids be separated, foster/wilderness/with dad.

2. Later on the accusation morphs into : the unauthorized therapist seeing the kids is using the THREAT of separation to force compliance.

3. The Motion asserts "based on information and belief" that dad is open to the recommendation , elsewhere presented as a threat, not a recommendation.

Translated....there is no factual basis whatsoever, in the info currently available, for the assertion that dad agrees with the kids being separated (if its even accurate that a therapist is suggesting it OR threatening it), much less for coming to conclusions about the stepmom.

 

[Margo/Mom]

BBM
Does the court have the ability to forbid the teachers from informing Mom about her children? How are their grades, are they acting out, do they have health issues, etc... Surely the mother is entitled to know those things, regardless of her ability to contact them at school.
I certainly don't think Dad is the only person capable of telling/knowing the truth in this case.

And if he would be willing to have two of the kids 'put away' for his own convenience (doesn't want to cope with rebellious disagreeable kids), then I am reminded of Solomon and the two mothers- one of whom was willing to have the baby -claimed by both- split in half. Most of us have moments when we can hardly bear to deal with our kids. But we would never send them away just to avoid the unpleasantness.

The mother may not have been perfect, but they love her and were doing well, regardless of her imperfections. Lots of parents are a little crazy, lots of people are a little nuts, but they are still capable of raising and caring for their children. This case is very ugly, and the children are suffering while being separated from their mother.

I would love to know what the stepmother thinks about all of this. Does she love the children devotedly despite the disruption they seem to be causing? Or does she wish it could just be the three of them, Mommy, Daddy, and little baby?

I do believe that courts can generally exclude a non-custodial parent from access to school records, not that I believe that to be the case here. My point was that a good bit of Mom's reply focuses on how she is being shut out of any and all information--and then claims to have information about how poorly they are doing. Her filing uses language like "deteriorating physically and mentally." Those are very serious charges. She has, through some of the FB echo chambers, made similar unfounded charges in the past--that the children were ill and coughing up blood while at camp (allegedly it was this, and not the need for routine physicals to be on file with the camp that spurred a trip to the doctor); and that the daughter was refusing to eat. Meanwhile, staff at the clinic office where they were seen reported that she was begging them to prevent the children from returning to camp. I believe that she also (based on a judge's order that while he was out of school he not be allowed to play computer games) kept the younger son out of school as part of the charade that he had been attacked by his father.

Getting good grades in school ought not be confused with "doing well." These kids have exhibited multiple behavioral pathologies that have been documented over time. The fact that there bizarre behaviors have been trotted out only in the presence of their father (or the court, our counselors, or their step-brother) ought not be taken as an indicator that he is the cause--or that everything is AOK at home with Mom. Because the opposite is most likely true.

 

[KaaBoom]

Begs a lot of questions, friend. Ought any child be empowered to throw off parental authority by telling a judge that they don't wanna?

Absolutely they should. The best interest of the child should be the only concern. If the child is in the custody of one parent, and thriving in that environment, then that's where they should stay. Don’t try to fix what is not broken, just because some judge is on a power trip.

These kid’s educational performance has now been disrupted. That could have life long repercussions for them. To say nothing about the PTSD that they are going to have from being handcuffed and taken to jail. Basically their otherwise happy lives have been disrupted for nothing.

 

[Hope4More]

Absolutely they should. The best interest of the child should be the only concern. If the child is in the custody of one parent, and thriving in that environment, then that's where they should stay. Don’t try to fix what is not broken, just because some judge is on a power trip.

These kid’s educational performance has now been disrupted. That could have life long repercussions for them. To say nothing about the PTSD that they are going to have from being handcuffed and taken to jail. Basically their otherwise happy lives have been disrupted for nothing.

Quite a pileup there of unsupported assumptions.

Probably a futile exercise, but will try anyway......

Put down all your assumptions for a moment. Think of this as a theoretical hypothetical might be.

Many folks here on WS have either been victimized in some way or have an interest in learning about crimes- who commits them, the trials that do or don't result, the justice that is or is not found.

I'm presuming then that you know something about people who aren't what they appear to be, about parents who harm their children, about parents who use their children as weapons of revenge.

Just for the moment consider the possibility that this mother is not what she projects herself to be. That she hates her husband enough and is off balance enough and so intent upon hurting her husband that she lost sight years ago of what was in her children's best interest.

If you have raised a child you know what it means to realize one day early on that OMG, my child thinks I am perfect, infallible, and that everything I say is unquestionably true. I really believe there is no greater responsibility in the world than trying one's best to never betray that trust.

Her children, any children in that situation , are of course going to believe what she says to them about all their reality, including about their father. They have no alternative that will allow them to survive intact psychologically. To expect them to disbelieve their own mother, no matter if what she tells them counters what they thought they knew to be true, is not only an unrealistic expectation but cruel.

What would you say about a mother who was willing to destroy her children's confidence in their ability to understand the emotional reality of what is happening to them? Or about a mother willing to encourage her own children to fear and despise their father for her own reasons?

Theoretically, what would you say about such a person? And of most relevance, do you believe such a mother should be given custody of those children? Even if when with her they get good grades and learn how to play the violin?

 

[Margo/Mom]

Absolutely they should. The best interest of the child should be the only concern. If the child is in the custody of one parent, and thriving in that environment, then that's where they should stay. Don’t try to fix what is not broken, just because some judge is on a power trip.

These kid’s educational performance has now been disrupted. That could have life long repercussions for them. To say nothing about the PTSD that they are going to have from being handcuffed and taken to jail. Basically their otherwise happy lives have been disrupted for nothing.

Courts, nor laws, have never supposed that children are the primary determiners of what is in their "best interest." They are developmentally and experientially lacking to be able to make sound decisions. This is why they cannot be bound to contracts, or consent to sexual relations--particularly with adults. Nor can they vote and most cannot drive automobiles. They are required by law to participate in education.

What you propose is that any child who is angry with a parent for any reason can march into a courtroom and be provided (at cost to the state, presumably) with a new foster family. And should they choose, they may repeat this process as often as they like. Or consider this alternate scenario. A 14 year old runs away from home because her parents insist that she observe curfew and go to school. She wishes to move in with her 24 year old boyfriend. Based on your principles she should be able to name said boyfriend her parent (seems like there was a Law and Order story like that once?)

 

[KaaBoom]

Courts, nor laws, have never supposed that children are the primary determiners of what is in their "best interest." They are developmentally and experientially lacking to be able to make sound decisions. This is why they cannot be bound to contracts, or consent to sexual relations--particularly with adults. Nor can they vote and most cannot drive automobiles. They are required by law to participate in education.

What you propose is that any child who is angry with a parent for any reason can march into a courtroom and be provided (at cost to the state, presumably) with a new foster family. And should they choose, they may repeat this process as often as they like. Or consider this alternate scenario. A 14 year old runs away from home because her parents insist that she observe curfew and go to school. She wishes to move in with her 24 year old boyfriend. Based on your principles she should be able to name said boyfriend her parent (seems like there was a Law and Order story like that once?)

I said nothing to that effect. Again what I said. If the child is in the custody of one parent, and thriving in that environment, then that's where they should stay. Don’t try to fix what is not broken, just because some judge is on a power trip.

 

[KaaBoom]

Quite a pileup there of unsupported assumptions.

Probably a futile exercise, but will try anyway......

Put down all your assumptions for a moment. Think of this as a theoretical hypothetical might be.

Many folks here on WS have either been victimized in some way or have an interest in learning about crimes- who commits them, the trials that do or don't result, the justice that is or is not found.

I'm presuming then that you know something about people who aren't what they appear to be, about parents who harm their children, about parents who use their children as weapons of revenge.

Just for the moment consider the possibility that this mother is not what she projects herself to be. That she hates her husband enough and is off balance enough and so intent upon hurting her husband that she lost sight years ago of what was in her children's best interest.

If you have raised a child you know what it means to realize one day early on that OMG, my child thinks I am perfect, infallible, and that everything I say is unquestionably true. I really believe there is no greater responsibility in the world than trying one's best to never betray that trust.

Her children, any children in that situation , are of course going to believe what she says to them about all their reality, including about their father. They have no alternative that will allow them to survive intact psychologically. To expect them to disbelieve their own mother, no matter if what she tells them counters what they thought they knew to be true, is not only an unrealistic expectation but cruel.

What would you say about a mother who was willing to destroy her children's confidence in their ability to understand the emotional reality of what is happening to them? Or about a mother willing to encourage her own children to fear and despise their father for her own reasons?

Theoretically, what would you say about such a person? And of most relevance, do you believe such a mother should be given custody of those children? Even if when with her they get good grades and learn how to play the violin?

Yes, I do. The kids were in a happy home where they were thriving with a parent whom they obviously love. They were preforming well academically and had a bright futures ahead of them. Now they have no futures.

They were taken away from that happy home by an abusive father who had previously locked them in a hot car, requiring them to call the cops to come and rescue them. Who left them rotting in jail while he took a trip out of the country, and who now wants to take them away from the only support structure they have left, by splitting them up.

 

[wendiesan]

Both parents are Israelis. Are you aware that is not unusual at all for very successful Israeli citizens to move to the US for an extended period, with every intention of returning home after gathering up professional experience that makes them even more marketable in Israel?

It sounds to me like that was the original plan. Dad abided by it and returned home, fully expecting his wife was on the same page. She changed her mind and wanted to stay in the US and to keep their kids here too.

Divorce sucks. Growing in different directions while in a marriage sucks. Bottom line to those kids' citizenship, though, is it was a byproduct of an understanding gone sour, and not of importance otherwise.

IIRC, it was the father's plan. Not the mother's plan. The mother agreed to continue the marriage in Israel and see how it went. She felt it wasn't working and returned to the USA, where all the children were born. "Daddy" knew perfectly well that they were not on the same page.

Citizenship. in my opinion, is not a byproduct of any understanding and can have extremely important consequences to a person's life. Since both the USA and Israel are signatory nations to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (aka the “Hague Convention&#8221,an international treaty formulated to deal with incidents of international child abduction, citizenship can be of prime importance when dealing with child custody disputes.

If IIRC, the children are considered to be USA citizens as it was the country of their birth, BUT, since they are the children of parents born in Israel, according to Israeli government regulations, they are also considered to be Israeli citizens. The children would have the same rights and responsibilities as other Israeli citizens. This would include making arrangements to deal with the compulsory military service aspect of those responsibilities at the appropriate age through the appropriate consulate, and having the necessary paperwork available should they decide to visit, or attend school, or become resident in Israel.

According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

Israel's Nationality Law relates to persons born in Israel or resident therein, as well as to those wishing to settle in the country, regardless of race, religion, creed, sex or political belief. Citizenship may be acquired by:Birth, The Law of Return, Residence, Naturalization. Acquisition of nationality by birth is granted to...Persons born outside Israel, if their father or mother holds Israeli citizenship, acquired either by birth in Israel, according to the Law of Return, by residence, or by naturalization...

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/aboutisrael/state/pages/acquisition of israeli nationality.aspx

 

[LinasK]

I said nothing to that effect. Again what I said. If the child is in the custody of one parent, and thriving in that environment, then that's where they should stay. Don’t try to fix what is not broken, just because some judge is on a power trip.

BBM. Ah, but it is broken, their mother has so far irreparably damaged their relationship with their father just because she is going through a nasty divorce with him. It's entirely possible the therapist recommended the kids be separated to undo the brainwashing of the mother. They may weaken their beliefs when they are not a pack.

 

[Hope4More]

Yes, I do. The kids were in a happy home where they were thriving with a parent whom they obviously love. They were preforming well academically and had a bright futures ahead of them. Now they have no futures.

They were taken away from that happy home by an abusive father who had previously locked them in a hot car, requiring them to call the cops to come and rescue them. Who left them rotting in jail while he took a trip out of the country, and who now wants to take them away from the only support structure they have left, by splitting them up.

Never mind.

 

[Morag]

Regardless of how the visits went/or didn't go, the father chose to spend 8-10 months a year in a country far away from his children. Yes, I know his job was in Israel. But his children weren't.

After 5 or 6 years, he manages to move back to the States with his new wife and child. He finds that his children don't like him, don't feel close to him, don't want to spend time with him. How is that a surprise?

Why doesn't he settle in a house near theirs, attend all their events, games, recitals? Get a puppy they might want to play with... Why did the father create so much drama?

They have lived with their mother for all their lives. If the dad had lived in the US all this time, perhaps there would have been joint custody. Instead, he wanted to parachute into their lives intermittently and expect that they would love and appreciate him rather than view him as a stranger.

For some reason, these children were handcuffed- handcuffed!- and led out of court. And that didn't happen while he was living in Israel. It happened when he came back to the states and, for lack of a better word, frightened them when they were forced to spend time with him.

And now an unauthorized therapist- apparently selected by Dad- has recommended that they be placed in yet another non-home place. How is any of this the mother's fault? Too bad some parents, both male and female, choose to remove themselves from their children's lives, and then expect the children to welcome them with open arms when it's convenient for the parent.

 

[jjenny]

BBM. Ah, but it is broken, their mother has so far irreparably damaged their relationship with their father just because she is going through a nasty divorce with him. It's entirely possible the therapist recommended the kids be separated to undo the brainwashing of the mother. They may weaken their beliefs when they are not a pack.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if father can't handle spending full time with the children. He was living in another country for years, after all, only having visits with children when he came back to US. And never mind children made it very clear they didn't want to spend time with him. Putting a child in foster care when this child has a loving mother (and nobody said that this mother is unfit) if ludicrous if you ask me.

 

[KaaBoom]

BBM. Ah, but it is broken, their mother has so far irreparably damaged their relationship with their father just because she is going through a nasty divorce with him. It's entirely possible the therapist recommended the kids be separated to undo the brainwashing of the mother. They may weaken their beliefs when they are not a pack.

Did the mother lock the kids in a hot car? No, that was the father.

Did the mother take a trip to Israel and leave the kids to rot in jail? No, that was the father.

Sending the kids to jail didn’t weaken their beliefs.

Separating the kids from their mother didn’t weaken their beliefs.

<modsnip>

 

[Margo/Mom]

Yes, I do. The kids were in a happy home where they were thriving with a parent whom they obviously love. They were preforming well academically and had a bright futures ahead of them. Now they have no futures.

They were taken away from that happy home by an abusive father who had previously locked them in a hot car, requiring them to call the cops to come and rescue them. Who left them rotting in jail while he took a trip out of the country, and who now wants to take them away from the only support structure they have left, by splitting them up.

Ummmmm--how do you lock someone in a car?

And the kids called the cops because their mom told them to.

 

[Margo/Mom]

I said nothing to that effect. Again what I said. If the child is in the custody of one parent, and thriving in that environment, then that's where they should stay. Don’t try to fix what is not broken, just because some judge is on a power trip.

I asked if any kid should be allowed to throw off parental authority at will. You said that they absolutely should.

 

[jjenny]

I am flabbergasted by this whole thing. Seems like in order for kids not to be alienated from their father, they have to be alienated from their mother and now apparently from each other. Is that really in their best interest? Court should be considering what is in the best interest of the children, not what is in the best interest of their father. If their grades are slipping, their whole future can be ruined.

 

[Margo/Mom]

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if father can't handle spending full time with the children. He was living in another country for years, after all, only having visits with children when he came back to US. And never mind children made it very clear they didn't want to spend time with him. Putting a child in foster care when this child has a loving mother (and nobody said that this mother is unfit) if ludicrous if you ask me.

In fact, I believe that the basis for Dad's request for full custody is that Mom is unfit. Apparently the prosecutor, who was a witness to the children's group tantrum when the children refused to enter the courtroom, was ready to file neglect charges based on Mom's uninvolvement--not only offering no encouragement to the children to enter the courtroom as required, but also offering no comfort.

I don't know what the ultimate outcome will be--the court has stepped back multiple times when it could have taken various actions against Mom. But certainly there is a fair amount of evidence to support unfitness--just from what is publicly available. An there are multiple reports we have not seen. I just don't think she is fully competent at this point.

 

[Margo/Mom]

I am flabbergasted by this whole thing. Seems like in order for kids not to be alienated from their father, they have to be alienated from their mother and now apparently from each other. Is that really in their best interest? Court should be considering what is in the best interest of the children, not what is in the best interest of their father. If their grades are slipping, their whole future can be ruined.

You have to keep in mind that there has been a long history of less intrusive responses that were frankly sabotaged by Mom's actions. One counselor who was scheduled to provide therapeutic parenting sessions with Dad and kids gave up because Mom made it impossible to schedule appointments. Another counselor gave up because the children refused to leave the waiting room.

I have no faith that Mom is currently in any way at all capable of working together with anyone (including her own attorneys), let alone Dad, to attempt any normaizing of relationships. I know that the court ordered a psychological (and if recommended psychiatric) exam in preparation to hear the custody challenge. If she complied, I hope that it successfully reveals her need for help.

 

[LinasK]

BBM. Ah, but it is broken, their mother has so far irreparably damaged their relationship with their father just because she is going through a nasty divorce with him. It's entirely possible the therapist recommended the kids be separated to undo the brainwashing of the mother. They may weaken their beliefs when they are not a pack.

To clarify since I can no longer edit my post- I meant separate the children from each other, not talking about them being away from the mother, although that would be as well.