Thursday, March 03, 2011

Newspaper prints anti-dad propaganda

A Calif free weekly just published this opinion article:
Karen Anderson suspected that something strange was going on between her ex-husband, Rex Anderson, and their 15-year-old daughter. Prior to the couple's separation in 1998, the girl would sometimes put on high heels and makeup, "visiting" her dad while he worked late at night in the family's basement. ...

After the divorce, Rex was given primary custody of his daughter, as well as the couple's 8-year-old son. ...

Family Court Judge James Stewart temporarily barred the children from seeing their father while the court looked into the abuse claims. But instead of seeking evidence as to whether molestation was taking place, he hired a Menlo Park–based psychologist, Leslie Packer, to evaluate both parents. Among Packer's tasks was to assess, in light of their psychological profiles, whether the accusations were likely to be true. After a series of interviews and personality tests, such as the Rorschach inkblot test, she delivered her opinion: Karen's fears for her daughter were unfounded. ...

Today, Rex Anderson is serving a 23-year sentence at Pleasant Valley State Prison in Coalinga. ...

Geraldine Stahly, a psychology professor at California State University at San Bernardino, likewise says that the family courts need to be revamped so as to devote more attention to evidence — as do other courts of law — rather than the opinions of individuals such as psychologists, mediators, or even judges. "I would like to see judges relying a lot less on psychological evaluations and a lot more on the facts of a case," she says.
I guess that the reader is supposed to be persuaded that the family court screwed up, and that the prison sentence is the proof. I don't see it that way.

Note that the alleged abuse began while the parents were still married and living together. If the mom is unable to detect the wrongdoing when she is living in the house where the alleged abuse is taking place, then how can anyone expect some dopey shrink to detect it? It seems likely to me that the mom was making false charges.

The family court is not a criminal court. The mom was free to present evidence of criminal wrongdoing to the police at any time. The man was innocent until proven guilty.

I do not assume that the dad is guilty in this case, because I do not think that such me get fair trials. But even if he is guilty, he is entitled to a fair trial. This includes all the constitutional guarantees, including confronting the evidence against him, presenting evidence in his behalf, getting a jury trial, etc.

Leslie Packer is just another leech in the family court system. She does not have the training, ability, or power to be judge, jury, and executioner. She just writes dopey little reports where she repeats what she heard in interviews. Maybe she will throw in some psychobabble terms, but my evaluators did not even bother with that.

This newspaper is trying to use a couple of scare stories to say that moms should get custody over dads, because of a threat of abuse. The argument is crazy anyway. The vast majority of the sexual abuse comes from step-dads, after the moms win custody from the real dads. If such abuse were really the main concern, then the prudent thing would be to always give custody to the biological dad.

Glenn Sacks also comments.


Anonymous said...

In 2003, he pleaded no contest to 25 counts of sex crimes against his daughter, including child molestation, sexual penetration of a child with a foreign object, and use of a minor to create pornography. When she turned 18, his daughter left his care and reported years of abuse to police in El Dorado County, where they were living. (SF Weekly is withholding her name as a victim of child sexual abuse.)

You "forgot" to put in the above. Selective editing to fit your theories does not make you look good.

George said...

I did not forget. I said that he was in prison. I gave a link to the full story. But I was commenting on the policy of the family court, and the info you describe was not available to the family court.

Karen Anderson said...

Just read the story you wrote of my divorce and child custody. Please let me help get your story straight.
I did submit medical information to the attorney's of the many times I took my daughter to the doctor where she complained of pain and showed bruising and redness of the pubic area. The bruising she said happened at school by a student kicking her of which was never proved. Her doctor thought it was strange that a child as young as she was having so many problems as this and also bladder infections at such a young age. My daughter made comments to me that raised my suspensions of things her father had said to her just prior to the divorce. I also reported to detective and former friend of mine that I had found nude pictures of very young girls in my ex's office of which was never investigated nor the medical records given to the court by the attorneys. There are many more details that you are not aware of that were not given to the court by the attorney's that if more interest had been given by all they would have been able to put two and two together and find out the truth and keep my children from a lot of pain and suffering. I did not know of the abuse taking place for it happened when I was not home and my daughter was threatened by her father of serious consequences to her and family if she told.