Here is what I said about the report:
Perlmutter's report is inconclusive
The May 2010 Perlmutter report recommended a range of temporary options. None of them resolve any of the pending issues, and the report does not recommend any plan towards a permanent order. I object to the report being used as evidence of anything, and to Mr. Perlmutter being considered as an expert.
As AngryMom will point out, the report is a damning document. On p.7 the report says that he does not understand why I was not charged with criminal emotional abuse, and on p.20 it says that my "insight and level of maturity" is less than that of my kids. On p.32 it says that I have a "superficial and not well developed understanding of some aspects of appropriate parenting." But it does not give any evidence that Julie is any better parent than I am, and it does not justify the continuing court supervision of our family that it recommends.
In his deposition, Mr. Perlmutter explained that his criticism of me is based on a couple of disagreements that he has with me. He disapproves of certain info that I have posted on the internet, and he believes that I should only explain my innocence to my kids in the presence of a therapist. He admitted that these opinions are not based on any generally accepted psychological knowledge, and he does not know whether anyone else shares these opinions. He felt very strongly about his opinions, but he testified that he did not recommend that they be ordered directly because he did not think that such an order would be legal. His only reason for recommending the visitation supervision was to circumvent the law and prevent me from directly telling the truth to my own kids about my own efforts to do things for them. He also recommended that Julie get sole legal custody so that she would have some power over what I post on the internet.
Whatever the merits of Mr. Perlmutter's personal opinions, they are not the law or the public policy of this state. It is wrong for this order to use a draconian child custody order to enforce indirectly what cannot be lawfully ordered directly.
Mr. Perlmutter admitted that his $19,350 investigation failed to find any evidence that I ever emotionally abused my kids, or that I harmed them in any way, or that my kids suffered under my care, or that I was any worse parent than anyone else, or that there were even any substantive allegations of any of those things. On p.38 he said, "A key and incontrovertible finding in this evaluation is that these children love and want a relationship with their father." He admitted that he does not know of any good that has ever come out of the court intervening in a situation like ours and that his opinion is not supported by anything that would qualify as admissible evidence.