Response to Board

I sent this letter to the California Board of Psychology, in response to their request:

I received your July 1 letter asking for additional documents. ...

Some of these documents put me in a bad light. Commissioner Joseph expressed the opinion that I emotionally abused my kids, but his principal allegations were that I reset an alarm clock for 7:00 a couple of times, and that I entered my daughter in a math contest above her grade level. There was also an allegation about running over a dog, but the dog owner testified that it never happened and that the dog was alive and healthy. For these trivial reasons, I was separated from my kids for nearly four years.

Judge Morse said that I am “physically incapable of perceiving” why I have been separated from my kids. In a sense she is right; I see no rational or valid reason for it.

I maintain that what I did was solely to benefit my kids, and that those actions were beneficial to them. They were not abusive under any definition of the term. No one has ever been able to tell me what is wrong with what I did.

I do not expect you to take sides in my child custody dispute. But if I did nothing wrong, then Ken Perlmutter should have explained that to the court. If I did do something wrong, then he should have explained to me and to the court how I can take steps to correct my behavior and restore my relationship with my kids. He did not. The result is that the court is clueless about how and when my kids can be reunified.

In case you think that I might be too stupid to understand what I have been told, I have a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley. Neither Perlmutter nor any of the other psychologists and evaluators have alleged any disorder of any kind.

If I had been accused of genuine abuse or neglect and if my case had been in juvenile dependency court, I would be given a reunification plan. Within one year, the court would have had to declare me unfit or give me my kids back. But instead, I am living under Perlmutter’s plan, and my kids are likely to be under court supervision until they are age 18. I am not even accused of doing anything contrary to generally accepted child-rearing standards, and yet I cannot see my kids and Perlmutter recommends that child-rearing decisions be made by a special master until my kids are age 18. The judge does not understand what the problem is, and she perpetually postpones our court case. This has continued for 3.5 years already, and there is no resolution in sight.

I have supplied my ex-wife, AngryMom, with the paperwork concerning this complaint. She notified the family court judge, Judge Morse, that she did not agree with me filing the complaint. Judge Morse suggested that AngryMom could file a motion to the court if she had an objection to me sending documents to the state Board. AngryMom decided not to file a motion. I do not object to her telling her side of the story.

A  reader writes:

Good for you! Turning over the rocks and letting the light of day shine on the vermin beneath! This week I am send the Board of Psychology a complaint on one of our favorites: Dr. Gay. ... I sent Morse my papers exposing their favorite parent coordinator as a fraud: ... Morse sent me back a letter saying only: 'I have looked into your concerns.' Interesting sentence, because it's fine as it is, but, it could also be a clause: 'I have looked into your concerns and have found them groundless.' or I have looked into your concerns and am investigating them further.'

Yes, let the light of day shine on the vermin. You must be onto something for the judge to send you such a suspiciously defensive remark.