I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Monday, May 11, 2009

IN OZ ~ Family abuse rules in dispute

Caroline Overington | May 11, 2009

Article from: The Australian

WOMEN who tie up the Family Court with false allegations of sexual abuse of their children should be required to pay all the associated court costs, according to the Shared Parenting Council of Australia.

The council, which represents many separated fathers, says mothers have for too long kept children away from their partners by alleging sex abuse.

Courts tend to take a cautious approach when abuse is alleged, and contact between fathers and children is restricted or supervised while abuse is investigated.

The law was changed in 2006 to make it possible for judges to award costs against women who made false allegations, to stop them tying up the court's time and the father's resources.

But the court's Chief Justice, Diana Bryant, wrote two weeks ago to Attorney-General Robert McClelland, asking for "urgent consideration" on repealing the changes. There is concern among lawyers that women have become anxious about raising genuine concerns about abuse of their children for fear of being lumped with legal costs.

The Shared Parenting Council says there is no evidence that "any harm at all" is being done to women, and that repealing the law will "reopen the floodgates to increased perjury and false allegations". "Surely the Chief Justice couldn't be condoning the re-establishment of a penalty-free process for one parent to make false and malicious allegations against the other?"

The number of false allegations is thought to be small but there are cases where judges believed it to have occurred.

In April, for example, in a case known as Dalziel and Belladonna, a judge sent a five-year-old girl to live with her father, saying there was no evidence he had abused his daughter.

Until the child is 10, the father is permitted to read the mother's emails and letters to her. The mother is not allowed to take the child to psychiatrists, psychologists or doctors to see if she is being abused by the father, as she had been doing.

The father told the court he believed the mother was coaching the child to make disclosures of abusive behaviour by him as part of a strategy to ensure he played no role in her life.

The mother told the court the father's "plausible and pleasant presentation hides a violent and psychiatrically disturbed man who has managed to hoodwink" judges, counsellors, magistrates and independent child lawyers".

"It would not be unfair to call the mother a woman with a mission. She made it clear that her task was to protect (her daughter) from abuse at the hands of the father and she could do nothing but focus on that task," the judge said.

"If she is perceived as uncompromising, that is a price she has to pay to protect her daughter."

But, he said, the court "could have no confidence in the mother's commitment to tell the truth and it must find that she was prepared to do and say whatever she thought necessary to convince the court of the case she sought to make".

Backlash: Women Bullying Women at Work

I wonder why anyone is surprised at this article. Feminists just can't get over themselves and then they find out if they want to compete in the open market for jobs then they have to be as aggressive as men. Its that artificial glass ceiling they say is in the way but dare I disagree and say they need to be as competitive as their rivals, men or women, and have all the requisite abilities. Some choose to not want to go there but its a personal choice not an artificial glass ceiling.MJM The New York Times May 10, 2009

YELLING, scheming and sabotaging: all are tell-tale signs that a bully is at work, laying traps for employees at every pass.

During this downturn, as stress levels rise, workplace researchers say, bullies are likely to sharpen their elbows and ratchet up their attacks.

It’s probably no surprise that most of these bullies are men, as a survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute, an advocacy group, makes clear. But a good 40 percent of bullies are women. And at least the male bullies take an egalitarian approach, mowing down men and women pretty much in equal measure. The women appear to prefer their own kind, choosing other women as targets more than 70 percent of the time.

In the name of Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem, what is going on here?

Just the mention of women treating other women badly on the job seemingly shakes the women’s movement to its core. It is what Peggy Klaus, an executive coach in Berkeley, Calif., has called “the pink elephant” in the room. How can women break through the glass ceiling if they are ducking verbal blows from other women in cubicles, hallways and conference rooms?

Women don’t like to talk about it because it is “so antithetical to the way that we are supposed to behave to other women,” Ms. Klaus said. “We are supposed to be the nurturers and the supporters.”

Ask women about run-ins with other women at work and some will point out that people of both sexes can misbehave. Others will nod in instant recognition and recount examples of how women — more so than men — have mistreated them.

“I’ve been sabotaged so many times in the workplace by other women, I finally left the corporate world and started my own business,” said Roxy Westphal, who runs the promotional products company Roxy Ventures Inc. in Scottsdale, Ariz. She still recalls the sting of an interview she had with a woman 30 years ago that “turned into a one-person firing squad” and led her to leave the building in tears.

Jean Kondek, who recently retired after a 30-year career in advertising, recalled her anger when an administrator in a small agency called a meeting to dress her down in front of co-workers for not following agency procedure in a client emergency.

But Ms. Kondek said she had the last word. “I said, ‘Would everyone please leave?’ ” She added, “and then I told her, ‘This is not how you handle that.’ ”

Many women who are still in the work force were hesitant to speak out publicly for fear of making matters worse or of jeopardizing their careers. A private accountant in California said she recently joined a company and was immediately frozen out by two women working there. One even pushed her in the cafeteria during an argument, the accountant said. “It’s as if we’re back in high school,” she said.

A senior executive said she had “finally broken the glass ceiling” only to have another woman gun for her job by telling management, “I can’t work for her, she’s passive-aggressive.”

The strategy worked: The executive said she soon lost the job to her accuser.

ONE reason women choose other women as targets “is probably some idea that they can find a less confrontative person or someone less likely to respond to aggression with aggression,” said Gary Namie, research director for the Workplace Bullying Institute, which ordered the study in 2007.

But another dynamic may be at work. After five decades of striving for equality, women make up more than 50 percent of management, professional and related occupations, says Catalyst, the nonprofit research group. And yet, its 2008 census found, only 15.7 percent of Fortune 500 officers and 15.2 percent of directors were women.

Leadership specialists wonder, are women being “overly aggressive” because there are too few opportunities for advancement? Or is it stereotyping and women are only perceived as being overly aggressive? Is there a double standard at work?

Research on gender stereotyping from Catalyst suggests that no matter how women choose to lead, they are perceived as “never just right.” What’s more, the group found, women must work twice as hard as men to achieve the same level of recognition and prove they can lead.

“If women business leaders act consistent with gender stereotypes, they are considered too soft,” the group found in a 2007 study. “If they go against gender stereotypes, they are considered too tough.”

“Women are trying to figure out the magical keys to the kingdom,” said Laura Steck, president of the Growth and Leadership Center in Sunnyvale, Calif., and an executive leadership coach.

Women feel they have to be aggressive to be promoted, she said, and then they keep it up. Then, suddenly, they see the need to be collegial and collaborative instead of competitive.

Cleo Lepori-Costello, a vice president at a Silicon Valley software company, came to the center for training. She got off to a bumpy start when she stormed into her new role “like a bull in a china shop,” Ms. Steck said.

In gathering feedback about Ms. Lepori-Costello, Ms. Steck heard comments like: “Cleo is good at getting things done but may have come on too strong in the beginning. She didn’t read the different cultural unspoken rules like she could have.”

So Ms. Steck and Kent Kaufman, another coach at the center, began a one-year, once-a-week individual coaching program. It included role-playing and monthly group discussions with other female executives who acknowledged that they also had major blind spots about being politic at work. (The group was once nicknamed the Bully Broads.)

When she came to the center, Ms. Lepori-Costello said, she thought her colleagues were not initially open to her ideas. Through coaching and conflict role-playing, she came to realize that her behavior was perhaps “too much overkill” and that she was not always attending to all the people around her.

Joel H. Neuman, a researcher at the State University of New York at New Paltz, says most aggressive behavior at work is influenced by a number of factors associated with the bullies, victims and the situations in which they work. “This would include issues related to frustration, personality traits, perceptions of unfair treatment, and an assortment of stresses and strains associated with today’s leaner and ‘meaner’ work settings,” he said.

Mr. Neuman and his colleague Loraleigh Keashly of Wayne State University have developed a questionnaire to identify the full range of behaviors that can constitute bullying, which could help companies uncover problems that largely go unreported.

Bullying involves verbal or psychological forms of aggressive (hostile) behavior that persists for six months or longer. Their 29 questions include: Over the last 12 months, have you regularly: been glared at in a hostile manner, been given the silent treatment, been treated in a rude or disrespectful manner, or had others fail to deny false rumors about you?

The Workplace Bullying Institute says that 37 percent of workers have been bullied. Yet many employers ignore the problem, which hits the bottom line in turnover, health care and productivity costs, the institute says. Litigation is rare, the institute says, because there is no directly applicable law to cite and the costs are high.

Two Canadian researchers recently set out to examine the bullying that pits women against women. They found that some women may sabotage one another because they feel that helping their female co-workers could jeopardize their own careers.

One of the researchers, Grace Lau, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Waterloo, said the goal was to encourage women to help one another. She said: “How? One way we predicted would be to remind women that they are members of the same group.”

“We believe that a sense of pride in women’s accomplishments is important in getting women to help one another,” Ms. Lau said. “To have this sense of pride, women need to be aware of their shared identity as women.”

In the workplace, however, it is unlikely that women will constantly think of themselves as members of one group, she said. They will more likely see themselves as individuals, as they are judged by their performance.

“As a result, women may not feel a need to help one another,” she said. “They may even feel that in order to get ahead, they need to bully their co-workers by withholding information like promotion opportunities, and that women are easier to bully than men because women are supposedly less tough than men.”

WHAT better place to be a bully than in a prison? Even so, that is exactly where Televerde, a company in Phoenix that specializes in generating sales leads and market insight for high-tech companies, set up shop. About 13 years ago, the company created four call centers in the Arizona state prison in Perryville, employing 250 inmates (out of 3,000).

Through immersion training, mentoring and working with real-world clients, these women can overcome their difficult circumstances, said Donna Kent, senior vice president at Televerde. “Often, they will win over bullies and we see the whole thing transform. That’s what gives us inspiration and our clients inspiration.”

TODAY, about half of Televerde’s corporate office is made up of “graduates” from Perryville, including Michelle Cirocco, the director of sales operations. She has seen how women treat one another in other settings and she thinks the root cause is that women are taught to fight with one another for attention at an early age.

“We’re competing with our sisters for dad’s attention, or for our brother’s attention,” Ms. Cirocco said. “And then we go on in school and we’re competing for our teachers’ attention. We’re competing to be on the sports team or the cheer squad.”

To be sure, the Televerde experience is not for every inmate, and those who are in it still must work hard to maintain a highly competitive position.

“As we get into the corporate world,” Ms. Cirocco added, “we’re taught or we’re led to believe that we don’t get ahead because of men. But, we really don’t get ahead because of ourselves. Instead of building each other up and showcasing each other, we’re constantly tearing each other down.”

Televerde reversed that attitude in Perryville, Ms. Cirocco said, by encouraging women to work for a common cause, much like the environment envisioned by the Canadian researchers.

“It becomes a very nurturing environment,” Ms. Cirocco said. “You have all these women who become your friends, and you are personally invested in their success. Everyone wants everyone to get out, to go on to have a good healthy life.”

If the level of support found at Televerde were found elsewhere, Ms. Klaus said, it would solve a lot of problems.

“The time has come,” she said, “for us to really deal with this relationship that women have to women, because it truly is preventing us from being as successful in the workplace as we want to be and should be.

“We’ve got enough obstacles; we don’t need to pile on any more.

Judge Judy Tells False Accuser: "You Didn't Play Fair!"


Judge Judy Tells False Accuser: "You Didn't Play Fair!"

The Honorable Judith Sheindlin has made it clear that the no-nonsense judge will not tolerate the manipulation of the judicial system by litigants who try to use restraining orders and false allegations of domestic violence to their advantage. During the April 30, 2009 episode of Judge Judy, Her Honor told her audience of 10 million people that the female defendant was not about to "put one over" on her. "That's how well I know your game," she told the defendant. "... you may get over on a judge tomorrow, but you're not getting over on me today ... I am going to tell you what you did wrong ... you didn't play fair!" This episode can be viewed at YouTube in two parts. Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xPk07BK3qA and part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRNLPn6gyZo. Judge Judy is viewed by 10 million people daily. That is a quick and efficient way to spread the word to the masses that the this type of abuse should not and will not be tolerated. Contact the producers of Judge Judy and let them know how important cases such as the one above really are by going to http://www.judgejudy.com/your_opinions.php. Then contact your local legislator and let them know that even Judge Judy and her audience of 10 million people are aware that false allegations of domestic violence and the overt abuse of restraining orders are "not fair." As always, please remember to be polite. To find your Representative's contact information go to http://www.house.gov and enter your zip code in the upper left corner.
Date of RADAR Release: May 11, 2009 R.A.D.A.R. – Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting – is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence. http://www.mediaradar.org.
YouTube - Videos from this email Part 2